Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
Extension Farming Systems Journal
volume 7
number 2
year 2011
ISSN 1833 – 2048 (online version)
ISSN 1833 – 203X (printed version)
Contents
Page
i
iii
iv
v
Contents
Editorial Board
Foreword
The character of the Extension Farming Systems Journal
Research Forum
1
M Titterton, R Eversole and J Lyall
The use of knowledge partnering as an extension strategy in adaptation to climate variability
7
KP Bryceson and GJ Slaughter
Aligning operational and corporate goals: A case study in cultivating a whole-of-business approach
using a supply chain simulation game
Industry Forum
17
H Kruger
Engaging the community in biosecurity issues
22
D Mason
Hawkesbury Harvest – a multifunctional agriculture model for regional rural development
27
MA Sarker, AH Chowdhury, MAM Miah, MK Aurangozeb and FA Peloschek
Participatory rural video centre in fostering women’s voices- A model from Bangladesh
33
JG Vargas-Hernández
Organizational sustainability: The case of handcrafts micro business in Southern San Sebastian
38
G Reid
Building a coordinated approach to Climate Change extension
41
C Bell and D Bayley
You are invited to the marriage of Extension and Vocational Training
48
R Stephens
Informing and empowering those in horticulture to make better business decisions
52
A McCaffery, J Montgomery, R Jackson, S Bray and S Priest
Optimising a model to deliver financial incentives – the lessons learnt through evaluation!
57
J Smith, J Lacy and S Fukai
Adapting the Cropcheck extension model to rice production systems in Lao PDR
63
A Senn, B Upjohn, S Machar, W Yiasoumi and P Bennett
Accountability in action – responsible disbursement of grants for environmental works on farms
67
A Senn, J O’Connor, W Dougherty and S Machar
Assessing on-ground works that reduce farm nutrient exports
72
K Forge-Zirkler, R Ballard, and M Taylor
Profitable biodiverse wool production systems for the Northern Tablelands of NSW: science and
extension working together
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
i
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
77
J Hamilton, M Quirk, R Dyer, J Scanlan, T Emery and D Phelps
A three-legged approach towards improved development and adoption of best-bet practices for
managing grazing lands across northern Australia
81
C Sudholz, D Shaw, S Wallis and J Wilson
A systematic approach to improving whole farm planning project delivery
86
K Charleston, M Miles and H Brier
IPM workshops for growers and consultants – lessons for R, D and E
92
J Sardelic, B Keeble, A Medhurst, G Kaine and E Tee
Innovative Service Delivery – A case study of new directions for the Victorian DPI
98
N Botha and H Roth
Eliciting New Zealand hill country farmers’ decisions to participate in a voluntary soil conservation
strategy
103 S Smith, M Connelly and W Hunt
Using structured self-assessment to improve cross cultural extension in the vegetable industry of
the Northern Territory
109
R Murray-Prior, FT Israel, RG. Bacus, DI. Apara, SB Concepcion, MO Montiflor, J Axalan, RJG
Lamban, RR Real, PJ Batt and MF Rola-Rubzen
Reducing poverty through participatory action learning and action research processes with
smallholder vegetable farmers in Mindanao
115 T Parminter
Opportunities for utilising voluntary policy methods in natural resource statutory planning
118 K Roberts, D Healy, R Apted and Mark Cotter
Restoring the landscape after Black Saturday
123 M Smith and S Newman
Working with the Vietnam Women’s Union– why a social–political organisation makes a good
research partner
126 P Thomas, S Adapa, E Davies, M Fortunato and T Alter
Intentional Innovation Communities: strengthening innovation performance in the Northern Inland
Region of NSW
ii
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
Editorial Board
Editors
Roy Murray-Prior
Curtin University
[email protected]
Neels Botha
AgResearch NZ
[email protected]
Secretariat
Rosemary Currie
Australasia-Pacific Extension
Network
[email protected]
Editorial Board Members
Ruth Beilin
University of Melbourne
Denise Bewsell
AgResearch NZ
Lisa Cowan
Department of Primary Industries, Vic
David Gray
Massey University
Christine King
Consultant
Greg Leach
SEQ Catchments
Chris Linehan
Department of Primary Industries, Vic
Jo Millar
Charles Sturt University
Ruth Nettle
University of Melbourne
Horrie Poussard
Learning & Action P/L
Janet Reid
Massey University
Kate Roberts
Roberts Evaluation Pty Ltd
Imogen Schwarz
University of Ballarat
Frank Vanclay
University of Groningen
Jane Weatherley
Rabobank
Editing for Industry Forum articles
Greg Mills from NSW Department of Primary Industries organised a team of editors/reviewers
for the Industry Forum articles in this special edition.
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
iii
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
Foreword
Welcome to Volume 7, Number 2 of the Extension Farming Systems Journal. This is a special
edition of the journal containing 23 Industry Forum papers presented at the 2011 APEN National
Forum ‘Hitting a moving target: Sustaining landscapes, livelihoods and lifestyles in a changing
world’ on the 29th and 30th November 2011 at the University of New England, Armidale NSW.
The Research Forum Section publishes outcomes of research in extension and contains papers
which have been subject to a blind reviewing process by two independent reviewers. The
Industry Forum Section is a forum for publishing papers on extension practice, case-studies and
stories. EFS will remain an on-line journal, although hard copies can be purchased at $25 per
copy plus postage.
Roy Murray-Prior
Neels Botha
Editors
iv
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
The character of the Extension Farming Systems Journal
The Extension Farming Systems Journal is jointly published by the Australasian Farm Business
Management Network (AFBMN) and the Australasia-Pacific Extension Network (APEN) with free
online access to AFBMN and APEN members and others. A printed version is available to
interested individuals and organisations by paid subscription. The journal is registered as with
DEST as satisfying the refereeing requirements for the Higher Education Research Data
Collection.
Extension Farming Systems Journal is an innovative extension publication of the AFBM Network
and APEN. This journal covers extension aspects of agribusiness systems. Extension Farming
Systems Journal is for farmers, farmer groups, corporate agribusiness managers, professional
farm business consultants, extension and development officers, academics, researchers and
postgraduate students who want to help extend the available knowledge about the efficient and
effective operations of farming systems in Australia. There are two formats for publication:
Extension Farming Systems Research Forum
Extension Farming Systems Industry Forum
Extension has many definitions but to provide guidance we will adopt that found on the
Australasia Pacific Extension Network website (http://www.apen.org.au).
Extension Farming Systems Research Forum
The Research Forum section of the journal will publish research into agricultural extension
issues that follow a recognised disciplinary research methodology. It is targeted at professional
extension practitioners and will be reviewed by the Editors and members of the Editorial Board.
Two Editors are appointed and Editorial Board members are nominated by the AFBM network
and APEN. The Editorial Board manages the Research Forum and the Editorial Board members
have advisory, mentoring and refereeing roles. The Executive Editor manages the printing of the
Journal.
Extension Farming Systems Industry Forum
The Industry Forum section of the journal - mainly targeted to professional farmers,
agribusiness managers, farm business consultants and extension practitioners - will be reviewed
by an industry panel to evaluate scholarship, readability, relevance to industry and capacity to
enable change. The Industry Forum section of the Extension Farming Systems Journal will
publish papers on farm business and farming systems technology highlights (typically with an
extension character), outstanding farm and agribusiness case-studies and leading farmers’
stories.
Who can access the Extension Farming Systems Journal?
EFS Journal is published online free of charge for AFBM Network and APEN members and a
wider audience. A subscription for printed copies of the journal can be ordered by contacting the
Secretariat. Hard-copy issues have a cost of A$25 (+GST) per issue.
Who can publish in Extension Farming Systems Journal?
Extension Farming Systems Journal is for members of the AFBM Network and APEN. Anyone
intending to publish a paper in Extension Farming Systems Journal who is not a member of
either organisation should initially apply for membership of the AFBM Network or APEN by
contacting
the
Administrative
Assistant
of
AFBMNetwork
at
[email protected] or the APEN Secretariat at [email protected]
Initially the Journal Editors will decide whether a paper and author meets the criteria for
acceptance into the reviewing process for either the Industry or Research Forum sections. The
criteria for assessing suitability will vary according to the details outlined under the Industry and
Research Forum sections of the Journal.
If accepted for the Research Forum it will be sent to two members of the editorial board for
review. The Editors will then decide whether to publish a paper after receiving reports from the
referees. If accepted for the Industry Forum it may be sent to reviewers from the Industry
Forum panel for consideration and then published if their comments are favourable.
To submit a paper for publication please send an electronic copy of your paper, edited as per
Instructions to the Editor at: [email protected].
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
v
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Research Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
The use of knowledge partnering as an extension strategy in
adaptation to climate variability
M Titterton,1 R Eversole2 and J Lyall1
1
Tasmanian Institute of Agricultural Research, University of Tasmania, Locked Bag 3523, Burnie, Tasmania
7320
2
Institute for Regional Development, University of Tasmania, Private Bag 3502, Burnie, Tasmania, 7320
Email: [email protected]
Abstract. To address the challenge of developing an effective extension program for
Tasmanian dairy farmers in the context of adaptation to climate variability, a knowledge
partnering approach was trialled. Knowledge partnering enabled extensionists to draw on the
knowledge and experience of Tasmanian dairy farmers about changing weather patterns and
the management implications of these and then design a program that could help farmers
meet the adaptation challenges they identified. Face-to-face interviews with dairy farmers
across all regions of Tasmania were carried out and the data collated for presentation and
discussion to focus group meetings in those regions. The outcomes of these meetings were
the identification of key issues related to adaptive change management practices on
Tasmanian dairy farms. The wider dairying community in Tasmania was then requested to
prioritize those issues as topics for the extension program and the program was designed in
response. By providing a structure for identifying and combining different kinds of knowledge
(scientific knowledge, farmer knowledge, management knowledge and extension knowledge),
the knowledge partnering approach allowed extensionists to design an effective extension
program that was directly relevant to farm management needs. It is concluded that
knowledge partnerships may be a key factor in extension strategy for climate change
adaptation.
Keywords: knowledge partnering, climate change adaptation, dairy farmers
Introduction
There is now strong evidence of climate change which for agriculture, presents opportunities
and challenges but in particular, increased risk and uncertainty (IPCC 2008; Howden et al.
2007). Mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions must be addressed and the ‘increasing scale of
potential climate impacts give urgency to addressing agricultural adaptation more coherently’
(Howden et al. 2007, p. 19697). Adaptation considerations and particularly, risk management,
will increasingly become key factors in reducing the impact of climate variability on the farming
operation. Agriculture is extremely vulnerable to climate variability with reductions in rainfall,
extreme weather conditions, floods and drought causing significant impacts on productivity
levels (Howden et al. 2008). While ‘further change is inevitable’, adaptation may halve the likely
economic impact of climate change (Heyhoe et al. 2007, p. 168). Nevertheless, there are no
definitive forecasts of the ‘potential magnitude and likely impacts of climate change’ to allow the
farming community to make informed management decisions (Heyhoe et al. 2007, p. 168;
Jacobs, 2010).
In the face of this, it is widely acknowledged that there has been rapid progress in research into
adaptation systems and that information and knowledge are essential skills for adaptation, yet
there have been few comprehensive efforts to develop climate risk communication strategies
that would be sufficiently effective to stimulate action on adaptation (Taylor et al. 2010).
Studies carried out in Canada and in Victoria, Australia, have shown that while farmers will
observe climate variability and weather events over the recent past, they may not equate these
events or larger trends as being part of the effects of climate change within their locality. In
these studies, factors such as region, sector, farming styles and farmer age had strong
associations with attitude to climate change (Bryant et al. 2000; Schwartz et al. 2009).
Encouraging adaptive management practices is therefore complicated by the fact that for some,
the need for adaptation is not readily apparent in the context of climate change and for
everyone, there are no definitive answers about the extent of adaptation that may be
necessary.
A key role of extension is to assist farmers to build adaptive capacity to make informed
decisions about risk management. Traditionally extension has been based on technology
transfer or on programmed learning, which comprises delivering specifically designed training
programs or workshops to increase understanding or skills in defined areas (Guerin and Guerin,
1994). Dissemination of research findings depends largely on these traditional extension
approaches to achieve productivity and environmental objectives (Kreeble et al. 2004). It is to
be expected therefore, that the increasing body of research findings predicting climate futures in
terms of atmospheric temperatures and levels of greenhouse gases and their management
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
1
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Research Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
implications for agriculture will in turn be disseminated within the framework of these extension
approaches. This will be accomplished with a view to building long term strategic understanding
and acceptance of climate change and adaptive management practice changes (Howden et al.
2007).
For adaptation in the short term, however, climate variability, which is inherently unpredictable
in its occurrence and severity, does not offer firm and proven evidence of projected extreme
climatic events which can be disseminated to farmers. Non-adoption of farming practices
developed from research findings occurs for many reasons. It is typically the result of a logical
thought process rather than uninformed or recalcitrant attitude (Pannell et al. 2006), so the
likelihood of adoption of risk management practices in the face of uncertain and unproven data
presentations about future events is likely to be poor. Clearly, traditional extension approaches
based on dissemination of proven research evidence are not appropriate in the current complex
and volatile climatic and economic environment. In this context, one of the few certainties in
climate variability is that risk management has assumed a greater role than ever in farming
systems.
Perceptions of risk, knowledge and experience are important factors at the individual and
societal level in determining how and whether adaptation takes place. Several studies in
developed countries have shown poorly perceived risk from climate change in the urban
environment where climate has little impact on livelihood and lifestyle due to technologies which
remove a direct dependence on climatic conditions (O’Brian et al. 2006, Wolf et al. 2009). In
agriculture, on the other hand, weather events and climate are key to livelihood and quality of
life and there is much greater sensitivity to changing weather patterns (Thomas et al. 2007)
and the potential risks engendered by these even if there remains a strong ambivalence to
whether they are anthropogenic and whether projected climate changes are real and likely to
continue (Howden et al. 2007).
In some cases, adaptive measures on farm are already in place while in other cases, challenges
and issues around adaptation have been intuitively recognized by farmers. This presents an
opportunity to industry service providers to capitalize on the local and farmer knowledge that
already exists in rural communities and use this practical expertise as a starting point to assist
these communities with effective and timely climate change adaptation strategies. A knowledge
partnering approach to regional development (Eversole 2010) brings together insights about
farmer knowledge (Cornwell et al. 1994), indigenous knowledge (Warren et al. 1995) and local
or rural people’s knowledge (Chambers 1983; Kloppenburg 1991) to inform mainstream
understandings of the role of ‘knowledge’ and ‘research’ in development processes. Knowledge
partnering is a methodology for identifying and addressing development issues (such as climate
risk and adaptation) by bringing different kinds of knowledge together in structured ways.
Knowledge partnering therefore offered a way to conceptualize farmers’ existing knowledge and
practice as a starting point for strategic capacity building around climate change adaptation.
Taylor et al. (2010) referred to the paucity of recognition by researchers of local knowledge,
needs and priorities that has led to missed opportunities to develop local capacity for responding
to climate-related threats. Knowledge partnering starts from farmers’ own knowledge of the
issues that emerge from on- farm management practice, not from research to be disseminated
and adopted. By assisting farmers to articulate their knowledge, issues and knowledge gaps,
knowledge partnering offers an alternative to traditional extension approaches that privilege
externally set content and learning goals. It provides a platform for bringing together the
knowledge of farmers, scientists, consultants and extensionists to understand and address
issues together.
In this study, knowledge partnering was trialled as an extension approach to meet the challenge
of developing an effective and relevant extension program which would assist Tasmanian dairy
farmers to develop coping strategies to adapt to climate variability.
Method
To gain an in-depth initial understanding of farmer knowledge and practice related to climate
variability, face-to-face in-depth interviews were conducted with a cross-section of farmers in
each of six climatic and social regions of Tasmania. These six distinct dairy regions included the
far northwest, northwest, central north, northeast, south and King Island. A total of thirty
interviews were conducted (five per dairy region) with farmers who accepted the invitation to
participate in the project. Within each region, there was a range of farmer ages, farm sizes and
herd sizes. A project information sheet and pre-survey form were sent out to the participants
before project staff visited to conduct the interviews.
A semi-structured interview script was developed with the purpose of identifying whether
2
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Research Forum
1.
2.
3.
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
farmers had noticed changes in weather patterns over the years they had been on their
farms or in the area
farmers had changed management practices to adapt to these changes
farmers could identify challenging management issues about which they felt they required
more information and which they felt could be discussed further in focus group meetings
for the purpose of designing and delivering an effective and relevant extension program
on climate change adaptation.
The interviews were conducted in an informal manner following a flexible format and recorded
with a digital voice recorder. The interviews were conducted over the six week period from 4th
May to 7th June 2010. The recordings were transcribed and observations, management
implications and challenges were noted from each interview. The data was collated and a ‘theme
grid’ based on this analysis was prepared for each region. The theme grid is used in knowledge
partnering to share information in a mutually comprehensible way. In this case, the theme grid
summarised the topics, issues, and related management implications and practices that farmers
identified in the interviews, for discussion and further elaboration in focus groups (see Table 1).
Participating farmers, along with other interested farmers, were invited to a focus group
meeting in each region to discuss the outcomes of the interviews as presented in the theme
grid, and agree on key issues required to be addressed in an extension program that would
meet their needs.
The discussions at the focus group meetings were recorded to allow further distillation of the
issues into major topics common across regions. The list of topics was incorporated into a
proposed draft program. This was sent with a questionnaire to all Tasmanian dairy farmers
requesting them to prioritize these topics for the final draft of the program. Of the recipients of
the mailed questionnaire to prioritize topics for the extension program, forty-four farmers
returned their feedback sheets. While this was a reasonable amount of feedback, it represented
only eight percent of the state’s dairy farmers. The responses from the farmers were again
collated to determine key topics to be addressed in the extension program.
Results
The following outcomes were noted from the farmers’ interviews and focus group meetings:
1.
2.
3.
4.
There were a notable number of observations by farmers of changing weather patterns,
temperatures and rainfall over time. This was particularly marked when the time period
was over ten years spent in their area and was common to all regions.
Some farmers reported both practical changes and contemplated changes in farming
systems over this time, suggesting that adaptive practices to weather changes had taken
place, common to all regions.
There were many issues and management challenges to adaptation identified by the
farmers and put forward for discussion by the focus groups.
Through facilitated discussion, the focus group meetings were able to effectively distill the
issues into key issues which were grouped again into theme grids in order to present to
the wider community for prioritization.
The data collated from the outcomes of the interviews and focus group meetings are shown in
Table 1. A small number of priority topics were consistently chosen by the dairy farming
community (Table 2). It was evident that the weather pattern changes observed by farmers
were reflective of climate variability and that broadly, the following challenges and threats were
identified as important factors in adaptation strategies :
1.
2.
3.
4.
Animal health and welfare: heat stress from the increasing frequency of very hot days in
summer; lameness and mastitis from prolonged wet seasons.
Feedbase systems: limited water to drought proof the farm; production of pastures and
forage crops under dryland conditions in increasingly seasonally dry conditions; pugging
of pastures under prolonged wet seasons.
Increasing costs of energy.
Increased conflict and tensions from working with people under stressful conditions.
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
3
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Research Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
Table 1. Theme grid on outcomes of interviews and focus group meetings for all
regions of Tasmania
Topic Raised
in Interviews
Management
Implications
Hotter, drier
summers
Heat stressed cows in
extreme heat
Low pasture growth
Moisture stress in
dryland pastures; less
soil moisture for
cropping
Soaks/springs
disappearing
Very wet
periods & rain
dumps
‘Wrecked farm’ saturated soils &
pugging
Downer cow
Lameness; mastitis
Less silage made,
poorer quality
Erratic weather
patterns,
extreme events
Flooding, power cuts,
Severe drought,
Storms damage,
Working with staff
under stress
Winters drier,
warmer/less
severe frosts
(snow melts
faster on
ranges)
Pasture renovation
earlier using direct
drilling for quicker
establishment
Power costs
increasing
Solar and wind
energy; improving
energy efficiencyexplore options
4
Practice changes
already in place or
being considered
More shelter belts,
rotating cows to
shady paddocks
Farm dams, dam
sizes increased, pivot
irrigators installed
Greater use of dry
tolerant species in
some dryland
paddocks;
Growing green fodder
in October instead of
December
More reliance on
irrigation but power
costs increasing
Autumn calving,
calving earlier in
spring; more
drainage; moving
cows to higher ground
Management
Option(s)
discussed
If heat becomes
the norm, could
use feedlotting &
sprinklers
Shading
Changing milking
times to suit cooler
periods
Increase water
storage & irrigation
Key topics for
extension program
Heat stress
Water storage and
water flow
management
Farm planning for
More drought
pastures and forage
tolerant pasture
crops;
species (e.g.
supplementary
cocksfoot, brome,
fescues) and forage feeding; forage
banks
crops
Water storage,
Irrigation schemes,
environmental water
flow management
Farming systems
planning,
infrastructure
Option to move
calving forward to
miss wet period,
feed pads; moving
cows to higher
ground;
Calving pads; herd Infrastructure
homes
Gravelled lanes and Infrastructure
drainage
Farm planning for
pastures;
supplementary
feeding; forage
banks
Use of meteorology
reports; insurance;
Risk management;
Coping with stress;
human resource
management
Research in
Climate futures;
pasture yields and
other cropping
opportunities with
increasing
temperatures and
CO2 emissions
Renewable energy
Solar, small wind
turbines,
microhydro
systems, biogas
from dairy effluent
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Research Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
Table 1. continued
Topic Raised in
Interviews
Management Implications
Greenhouse Nitrous oxide
Use of biological fertilizers;
gas
from nitrogen
application of nitrogen in
emissions
fertilizer loss;
liquid form
applying nitrogen
in wet, cold
conditions;
methane loss
from effluent
tanks; feeding for
reduced methane
emissions; soil
carbon
sequestration
Management Key
Practice
topics for
Option(s)
changes
extension
already in place discussed
program
or being
considered
Research into
forms of nitrogen
application;
trapping methane
for biogas;
research into
feeding for
minimum
methane emission
Table 2. Priority topics chosen by dairy farmers and to be incorporated into the
extension program
Main theme
Topics covered
Energy efficiency
Efficiency in the shed and irrigation, negotiable power
Animal health and welfare
Heat stress management, lameness, mastitis and downer
cow management under stressful conditions.
Water
Water storage, irrigation development, water use
efficiency, environmental water flows
Renewable energy systems
Viability of solar, wind, microhydro, biogas
Feedbase management
Pastures for dry tolerance, efficient management of
irrigated and dryland pasture and crops; supplementary
feeding; forage banks.
Infrastructure and farm system planning
Laneways, calving pads, feed pads, stand off areas,
drainage
Greenhouse gas emission mitigation
Soil carbon sequestration, nitrogen management,
effluent management for biogas, optimal rumen nutrition
People and stress
Coping with stress, risk management in the business,
human resource management
Based on these priority issues, it was then possible to draw up the final draft of the extension
program relevant to the needs of Tasmanian dairy farmers to build capacity to adapt to climate
variability.
Discussion and conclusion
Farmers are more sensitive to, and place more emphasis on variability in conditions such as
precipitation intensity at critical periods of crop or pasture development and variation in local
conditions and will often implement on-farm changes following a climatic event perceived as
extreme in agricultural terms (Reid et al. 2007). In the abovementioned Victorian study
(Schwartz et al. 2009), it was found that even as acknowledgement of climate change was
ambivalent, four major adaptations that were already in place on some farms were adoption of
water use practices, adoption of new technologies, changes to crop, pasture or grazing systems
and changes to business structure. These findings validate our argument that in order to build
climate change adaptive capacity, farmers should be engaged by stimulating, encouraging and
helping them become involved with learning projects they see as relevant to improving their
situations. When farmers are recognized by stakeholders as active in the process, they become
both learners and teachers, contributing to information flow, generation and adoption (Taylor et
al. 2010). This was substantiated by the results of our study where it was found that farmers’
knowledge and intuitive understanding of the need to adapt to what were clearly changing
weather patterns, whether or not they were acknowledged as representing climate change,
were significant. It was further validated in the outcomes of the focus group meetings where
discussion led to general concurrence that issues raised in the interviews warranted attention.
Extensionists were then able to identify topic experts in the broader community who could
speak about these issues with farmers in the resulting extension program.
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
5
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Research Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
It is concluded that this study has provided strong indications that knowledge partnering is a
valuable approach in extension methodology for advisors and extension strategists, particularly
in the complex and difficult sphere of adaption to climate variability. However, the sample used
in this study was small and derived from one sector of the agricultural industry. It is
recommended that the scope of the study be widened to trial the knowledge partnering
approach in other primary industry sectors and across regions with a greater range of topoclimatic and social conditions to establish whether knowledge partnering is applicable to
extension planning for adaptation in national rural systems and natural resource management.
References
Byrant CR, Smit B, Brklacich M, Johnston TR, Smithers J, Chjotti Q and Singh B 2000, ‘Adaptation in
Canadian agriculture to climate variability and change’, Climate Change, 45 (1): 181-201.
Chambers R 1983, Rural Development: Putting the Last First, Longman, New York.
Cornwall A, Guijt I and Welbourn A 1994, ‘Acknowledging process: Methodological challenges for agricultural
research and extension’, in I Scoones and J Thompson (eds) Beyond Farmer First. London: IT
Publications.
Eversole R 2010, ‘Enabling Regional Innovation: The Knowledge Partnering Approach’, paper presented at
the 34th Annual Conference of the Australian and New Zealand Regional Science Association
International (ANZRSAI) ‘Innovation and Regions: Theory, Practice and Policy’, Melbourne, 7-10
December.
Guerin LJ and Guerin TF 1994, ‘Constraints to the adoption of innovation in agricultural research and
environmental management: a review’, Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture, 34:549-571.
Heyhoe E, Kim Y, Kokic P, Levantis C, Schneider K, Crimp S, Nelson R, Flood N and Carter J 2007, ‘Adapting
to climate change-issues and challenges in the agriculture sector’, Australian Commodities: Forecasts
and Issues, 14(1):167-178.
Howden SM, Soussana J, Tubiello FN, Chhetri N, Dunlop M and Meinke H 2007, ‘Adapting agriculture to
climate change’, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 104
(50):19691-19696.
Howden SM, Crimp SJ and Stokes CJ 2008, ‘Climate change and Australian livestock systems: impacts,
research and policy issues’, Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture, 48 (7):780-788.
International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 2007, ‘Fourth Assessment Report:Climate Change (AR4).
Jacobs K 2010, ‘Providing the essential information, knowledge and skills for adaptation’, in (Abst) 2010
International climate change adaptation conference : climate adaptation futures, Conference Handbook
June 29-July 1, National Climate Change Adaptation Research Facility, Gold Coast, Australia
Kreeble B, Robertson D and Johnson F 2004, ‘A qualitative approach to improve the effectiveness of
products of research findings for users: a case study of the Analytical Irrigation Model’, Australian
Journal of Experimental Agriculture, 44:207-212
Kloppenburg, J. J. (1991) Social theory and the de/reconstruction of agricultural science: local knowledge
for an alternative agriculture, Rural Sociology, 56 (4), 519–548.
O’Brian KL, Eriksen S, Sygna L and Naess LO 2006, ‘Questioning complacency:climate change impacts,
vulnerability and adaptation in Norway’, Ambio, 35(2):50-56.
Pannell DJ, Marshall GR, Barr N, Curtis A, Vanclay F and Wilkinson R 2006, ‘Understanding and promoting
adoption of conservation practices by rural landholders’, Australian Journal of Experimental
Agriculture, 46(11): 1407-1424.
Reid B, Smit W, Caldwell B and Belliveau S 2007,’Vulnerability and adaptation to climate risks in Ontario
agriculture’, Mitig. Adapt. Strat. Glob Change, 12.
Schwartz I, McRae Williams P, Lehmann L and Hanlon B 2009, ‘Understanding farmer knowledge and
attitudes to climate change, climate variability and greenhouse gas emmissions’, A Water in Drylands
Collaborative Research Program (WIDCORP) report for the Department of Primary Industries, Victoria,
Australia, No.1/09 Melbourne.
Taylor A, Devisscher T and Padgham J 2010, ‘Enabling climate adaptation: navigating communication
pathways’ in (Abst) 2010 International climate change adaptation conference : climate adaptation
futures, Conference Handbook June 29-July 1, National Climate Change Adaptation Research Facility,
Gold Coast, Australia.
Thomas DSG, Twyman C, Osbahr H and Hewitson B 2007, ‘Adapting to climate change and variability in
Southern Africa: farmer responses to ultra-seasonal precipitation trends in South Africa’, Climate Change
83:301-322.
Warren DM, Slikkerveer LJ and Brokensha D (eds) 1995, in The cultural dimensions of development,
indigenous knowledge systems, IT Publications, London.
Wolf J, Lorenzoni I, Few R, Abrahmson V and Raine R 2009,’Conceptual and practical barriers to adaptation:
an interdisciplinary analysis of vulnerability and response to heat waves in the UK’, in WN Adger, I
Lorenzoni, K O’Brian (eds) Adapting to climate change:thresholds, values, governance, Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge.
6
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Research Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
Aligning operational and corporate goals: A case study in
cultivating a whole-of-business approach using a supply chain
simulation game
KP Bryceson1 and GJ Slaughter2
2
1
School of Agriculture and Food Science, University of Queensland , Brisbane, Qld 4072,.
School of Accounting Economics and Finance, University of Southern Queensland, Toowoomba Qld 4350
Email: [email protected]
Abstract. This paper outlines the development and use of an interactive computer-based
supply chain game to facilitate the alignment of disconnected operational and corporate goals.
A multi-enterprise internal cattle supply chain was simulated targeting the operational
property managers and the overall impacts of their decision making on corporate goals A
three stage multidisciplinary approach was used. A case study based financial analysis was
undertaken across the internal cattle supply chain, a participative action research component
(developing the game to simulate the flow of product and associated decisions and financial
transactions through the internal supply chain of the company for different operational
scenarios using measurable and familiar operational and financial criteria as tracking tools),
and a qualitative analysis of organisational learning through player debriefing following
playing the game. Evaluation of the managers’ learning around the need for a change in
general practice to address goal incongruence was positive evidenced by changes in practice
and the game regarded by the users as a useful form of organisational training. The game
provided property managers with practical insights into the strategic implications of their
enterprise level decisions on the internal supply chain and on overall corporate performance.
The game is unique and is a tool that can be used to help address an endemic problem across
multi-enterprise industries in the agrifood sector in Australia.
Keywords: Agribusiness, Business simulation, Computer game, Internal Supply Chain,
Organisational learning.
Introduction
Managing a multi-enterprise organisation with distributed geographic locations is complex. A
particular concern of senior management is ensuring that the work undertaken by property
managers adds value not only to their respective business units but also to the overall
organisational viability and profitability (Collis and Montgomery 1997). One of the key issues
faced by a business, particularly a multi-enterprise one, is that of managing the internal supply
chain effectively (a supply chain being the flow of goods and information necessary for raw
materials to be transformed into finished products). In a multi-enterprise organisation, the
management of this flow can be difficult as there is the tendency for a disconnect to develop
between the goals of each component in the supply chain and the overall business goals (Huin
et al. 2002). This is mainly because each component is often an autonomous business unit or
profit centre. This situation can result in a lack of integration, coordination, communication and
thus cooperation. Thus if goal incongruence (when individuals or groups within an entity may
have only partly overlapping goals) amongst components of the supply chain develops, a risk to
supply chain integration and thus to value creation for the business ensues (Foss and
Christensen 1996; Beamon and Bermudo 2000).
As with other aspects of managing supply chain performance, there has been much work over
the last twenty-five to thirty years that addresses the issue of managing the alignment of either
internal business units or external business partners to maximise competitive advantage (White
1986; Landeros and Monczka 1989; Laseter 1997; Handfield et al. 1999; Lee and Amaral 2002;
Harrison and Godsell 2003; Bryceson and Slaughter 2009, 2010). Such work has shown that
goal incongruence and a lack of cohesion can easily develop even in well managed supply
chains, but that this can be managed by using appropriately holistic performance metrics and by
developing an organisational/corporate knowledge of supply chain issues through internal
company educational processes.
For all organisations, the cultivation of organisational knowledge is the essence of developing
core competencies necessary to maintain the organisation (Spender 1996). However,
organisational knowledge that constitutes a core competency is more than just ‘Know What’
(explicit knowledge that is easily shared with others for example, in manuals and reports). A
core competency (defined by Prahalad and Hamal (1990) as the collective learning skills behind
a business’s product lines), requires the more elusive ‘Know How’ or in-head tacit knowledge
which is an individual’s particular ability to put ‘know what’ into practice (Brown 1998) and is
characterised by reflective thought and action.
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
7
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Research Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
In the organisational learning literature the debate as to what is knowledge and how it is related
to individual learning is ongoing (Spender 2008). Starbuck et al. (2001) define organisational
learning as being the internal adaptation processes that take place when the organisation is
challenged by externalities. Organisational knowledge is then what is created as a result of
these internal processes (Tsoukas and Mylonopoulos 2004) and where and how such
organisational knowledge is located in the organisation (Spender 1993). However, the difference
between an individual within an organisation gaining core competencies to address
organisational needs by learning new ‘knowledge’, and organisational learning and
organisational knowledge that can be used to address tension between property and senior
managers, is a key issue from an organisational training perspective and is the issue which is
addressed in the study outlined in this paper.
Computer-based learning environments
Computer gaming is a hugely influential popular culture. Many games aim just for sheer
entertainment while others may also be educational, intellectually challenging or emotionally
engaging (Salen and Zimmerman 2003). In this study the aim was to develop a computerbased business simulation that could provide a learning tool for property managers and which
could be played as a competitive game.
The debate on whether a simulation constitutes a computer game, has changed over time.
Crawford (1982) identified a simulation as a model of complex processes making a serious
attempt to accurately represent a real phenomenon, through an artificially constructed and
competitive process and thus does not constitute a game. Ruohomaki (1995) combined the
terms and defined a simulation game as one which “combines the features of a game
(competition, cooperation, rules, participants, roles) with those of a simulation (incorporation of
critical features of reality). A game is a simulation game if its rules refer to an empirical model
of reality" (Ruohomaki 1995, p.14).
Later, Maier and Größler (2000) proposed two typologies of simulations: modelling oriented
simulation tools (i.e. those used to model particular issues), and gaming oriented simulation
tools. Lean et al. (2006) went further and identified three specific types of simulation-based
learning: role play (where participants act out the role of a character in a particular situation
following a set of rules); gaming (which involves interaction within a predetermined context,
often involving forms of competition, cooperation, conflict or collusion and constrained by set
rules and procedures); and computer simulation (which replicates whole of system
characteristics using mathematics or simple representations of objects).
In reality, Wilson et al. (2009) in their review agree that games can and do contain elements of
simulations and simulations can and do contain elements of games - and thus how a simulation
or game might be defined should be related to what it sets out to do and how it achieves this
outcome. Anderson and Lawton (2009) similarly accept such “mixed” definitions but then go on
to be careful to restrict their investigation into how effective business simulations are for
learning to “computer-based simulations in which students or groups of students compete to
achieve success in a modelled market environment”
In this paper the purpose of the tool developed was to simulate an abstract model of the
internal supply chain system of a business with the view to creating a novel but non-threatening
learning environment through game-based competition between groups of managers. As such,
the term business simulation game adequately describes what was created in this study and the
remainder of this literature review reflects this terminology.
Validity of simulations and computer games as learning tools
There has been some debate as to whether simulations and/or computer games have real value
as educational tools. Malone (1981) identified three main ways in which games were able to
motivate players towards learning: through fantasy, challenge and curiosity. Later, Cordova and
Lepper (1996) showed that learning activities presented in a meaningful and interesting setting
such as a computer game could have substantial benefits to learning – a finding supported by
Betz (1996) in his analysis of the simulation game SIM City where he highlighted the learning
benefits gained in playing the game as whole of systems thinking/learning and problem solving
skills development. Prensky (2001) argued that digital game-based learning works primarily for
three reasons:
1.
2.
3.
8
The added engagement that comes from putting the learning into a game context. This
can be considerable, especially for material people are not willing to learn.
The interactive learning process employed.
The way the two are put together in a highly contextual package.
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Research Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
McFarlane et al. (2002) and Kirriemuir and McFarlane (2004) found that games play can support
valuable skill development such as: strategic thinking, planning, communication, application of
numbers, negotiating skills, group decision-making and data-handling - all of which is supported
by Pivec and Dziabenko (2004), Vogel et al. (2006) and Lynch and Tunstall (2008) who have
demonstrated that computer game-based learning, if developed appropriately, can encourage
learners to combine knowledge from different areas in order to choose a solution or to make a
decision at a certain point – and to test how the outcome of the game changes based on their
decisions and actions. Additionally Pivec and Dziabenko (2004) found that if learners can be
encouraged to contact other players to discuss and negotiate subsequent steps, their social
skills were found to improve.
Despite the positive literature around the use of simulations and games as learning tools, there
are a number of authors who have raised issues and remain concerned in relation to exactly
what can be/is learned from such tools. For example, Burns et al. (1990), Gosen and Washbush
(2002) and Anderson and Lawton (1992, 1997, 2002) show that performance in doing a
simulation and learning from it is not linked or at best is only weakly aligned. More importantly,
Anderson and Lawton (2004) show that evaluating learning outcomes from such tools is
extremely difficult as it depends on how the researcher has set up both the simulation of, and
the evaluation of learning.
However, Vygotsky (1978), Wells (1999) and Bryceson (2009) have found that if grounded in
learning theory and developed from the point of view of the learner rather than the technology
per se, a computer-based learning environment – whether a simulation or a game - is an
excellent scaffolding mechanism for enabling deep learning to occur and for transferring ‘Know
What’ skills into ‘Know How’ skills. What is also agreed upon by many authors (Dempsey et al.
1997; Seay 1997; Angehrn and Nabeth 1997; Becta Report 2001; Jayakanthan 2002; Annetta
et al. 2007), is that the design of the environment should emphasise elements that facilitate the
learning process while remaining ‘fun’ and that ‘learning through doing’ by playing games and
simulations which in general motivate ideas about life, survival, strategy, role-playing and
building relationships, offers a powerful knowledge acquisition and learning tool (Crawford
1982).
The development of the computer-based business simulation game used in this study was thus
based on this premise and as indicated earlier, was created to enhance new ‘Know How’ skills
associated with the leveraging of company performance information within a large corporate
agribusiness in the cattle/beef industry in Australia.
The study
The study was in response to senior managers of ACGC (the company involved has requested
anonymity and is thus referred to as ACGC throughout the remainder of this paper) identifying
some key internal supply chain issues within ACGC relating to overall corporate profitability that
had resulted from poor use of company management accounting information by property
managers. A training tool and associated training were requested that would enhance
organisational learning and thus managerial performance at the property level.
Approach
A three-stage approach to the project was employed which involved:
1.
2.
A case study analysis (Yin 2002) of ACGC company financial data as found in the monthly
company report to provide an understanding of the current KPIs applied to property
managers and the disconnect between the internal business unit (operational) goals and
overall corporate (strategic) goals that senior management thought they had identified.
A participative action research stage (Whyte 1989) which included the development of a
business simulation model and game development using actual company financial and
production data. The implementation phase within the company involved nine property
managers playing of the game in three teams of three people each. This enabled an
interactive data gathering on the quantification of financial impacts across the company
associated with the relationship between the information property managers were
provided with, and:
(i) Their operational activities relating to specific production issues for each type of
property.
(ii) What prompted the decisions associated with those activities;
(iii) How such decisions related to operational or corporate management goals.
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
9
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Research Forum
3.
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
An analysis of the observations and related issues (debriefing) that emerged as a result of
playing the business game and from discussions on the reasons for making the decisions
that were made during the game.
Company Background and Management
ACGC is a multi-enterprise agribusiness. That is, the company comprises a number of different
operational business units that are either supplied by, or supply, another component within the
company to form an internal supply chain. Each operational business unit is an independent
property run by a property manager and associated staff. Each property has its own individual
operational budget and is regarded as a profit centre - although all properties are expected to
contribute to the overall profitability of the company as their first priority.
Internal Supply Chain
ACGC has a number of properties across northern and eastern Australia which span the
operational cattle production areas of breeding, backgrounding and finishing. The internal
supply chain of ACGC (Figure 1) therefore consists of:



Breeding Properties
Backgrounding Properties
Finishing Properties
Figure 1. Schematic of the ACGC internal supply chain simulation
(N.B.Transfer prices received, and the ensuing profits or losses incurred at each stage of the internal supply
chain, provide an internal measure of revenues and expenses that replicate what would happen if cattle
were bought and sold on the open market).
The internal supply chain includes the physical flow of goods and the associated management
accounting information flows that are required for raw materials to be transformed into finished
products within the overall company (Fisher 1994; van Helden et al. 2001; Christie et al. 2003;
Kaplan and Norton 2004; Simons 2005). A major component of the accounting information flow
in ACGC is that associated with transfer pricing between operational units which is used within
the organisation as a proxy for market prices of cattle when transferring product (cattle) from
one part of the internal supply chain to the next.
ACGC corporate management identified that property managers did not have a clear
understanding of the overall corporate goals and how production synergies across the internal
supply chain are important in achieving these. Inappropriate or inadequate training was
identified as the major problem area and although initiatives in ACGC to broaden the financial
management skills and to create a focus on internal supply chain issues had been undertaken,
these were regarded as having had limited success. It was decided that a training exercise that
clearly demonstrated the financial implications of property managers’ management decisions on
the internal supply chain was required. A computer game using actual company data was
requested by ACGC. The aim of this game was to simulate an interactive business exercise
10
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Research Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
which could be used with trainer support during a one week company retreat where all Property
Managers would be in the same place at the same time, as well as thereafter in the company.
Design of ACGC’s Business Simulation Game
The aim of the simulation was to demonstrate the financial flow-on effects from one property to
another as a result of individual management decisions (e.g. What is the production
management impact and/or the financial impact of a decision made by a Breeder on a
Backgrounder?), and thus how decisions made across the internal chain affect the financial
performance of the whole company. The simulation was underpinned by actual company data
and potential outcomes validated to ensure realistic outcomes from business decisions. The
design of the game was therefore driven by how an internal supply chain underpinned by
corporate accounting information from ACGC would be portrayed so that each player could
understand the context in order to gain meaning (Salen and Zimmerman 2003). Crawford
(1982), Bateman and Bloom (2005) and Adams and Rollings (2006) discuss four key aspects of
a game which should be thought about prior to developing a game.
(1) The Game System which represents the system of rules that create the game framework
and govern how it is played. The underlying context of the simulation game discussed here was
the internal supply chain and flow of product (number of cattle, weight of cattle (kg), value ($))
from the Breeding enterprise through the Backgrounding enterprise through to the Finishing
enterprise, linked to the decisions being made about that product flow in line with corporate
business information.
The game system was a formal, experiential and closed system built in MS Excel using built-in
functions and programmable macros which were used to control the flow of player input, and
the internal calculation and presentation of output to the players. MS Excel was chosen because
it is a powerful general purpose program available on most business’s computers enabling the
game to be used and/or edited and upgraded by the company beyond the life of the project.
The aim of the game was two-fold:


Manage production for the whole herd (given specific criteria)
Manage costs and returns for the whole herd (given specific scenarios).
Players were scored on their management of costs and their business acumen (i.e. their use of
information provided, their decision making and the returns they got as a result of their
decisions).
(2) The Game Mechanics which represents the internal algorithms that address how the model
underpinning the game actually runs and the sequence of play associated with decision making
activities of the players within a situation or scenario.
Two scenarios were created for the game to be played under: a ‘Normal’ climatic situation (i.e.
normal production, choice of transferring at different weights to obtain different value
outcomes) and a ‘Drought’ situation (same as in the Normal case but including a supplementary
feeding on grain option with associated financial implications). These scenarios were run one at
a time because property managers of properties in Australia who made different decisions about
the same issues under these two scenarios, which in reality tend to be an “either” “or” situation;
because a high degree of control of the situation in which the players made decisions was
required.
(3) The Game Input/Output which represents what the user sees on the screen (output) and
what commands the user can give to the program to obtain a desired result (input). Player
interaction or input/output in the game was via a series of MS Excel worksheets that were
accessed through a Title Page with a company graphic, an Instruction page which gave the
overarching goals of the game and how it was to be played either under normal or drought
conditions.
A ‘Setting-the-Scene’ box on each enterprise’s input page presented the details of the property
being managed. Additionally, a series of input parameters, each with an associated drop down
menu containing multiple potential answers was included in each enterprise sheet which were
designed to allow players to rapidly explore many options easily and to provide an insight into
managers’ decision making. Additional information was provided through comments attached to
the appropriate input parameter.
Once the input parameters are populated, clicking on ‘Breeder Results’ gives the results
associated with the answers chosen through the Breeder Enterprise Results page. The
backgrounder and finishing enterprises have the same input and results pages with variations in
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
11
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Research Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
the input variables for relevant parameters such as cattle weight and feed supplementation
costs. The process is followed for both the backgrounder and finisher phases respectively
(4) The Game Play which refers to the way in which game actions result in game outcomes. In
particular, Salen and Zimmermann (2003, pp. 34-35) refer to generating ‘meaningful play’ in a
game which they believe is the goal of successful game design and which emerges from the
relationship between player action and system outcome: the player takes an action and the
system responds.
The game played in the developed game allowed the person/s running the simulation game to
make decisions at each stage of the internal supply chain (Breeder, Backgrounder, Finisher) relating to the specific production issues for each type of property. The decisions made by each
player were logged and the effects of those decisions, both on the property type being
‘managed’ in the simulation, and on the other properties (internal supply chain components),
were traced and evaluated using some simple criteria e.g. weight (kg/head), numbers of
animals, market price ($/kg) costs ($/kg) and time (days) to produce final weight. Each
manager was also asked to keep a log of what information they used to make decisions and the
reasons why decisions were made from their perspective. Algorithms kept track of cattle weight
and cash flow calculations continuously.
In practice, the exercise was undertaken for one hour a day for five consecutive days by ACGC
property managers playing in teams of three people. Each team included a manager from each
type of property in the internal supply chain - Breeding, Backgrounding and Finishing. As
indicated earlier the aim of the exercise was to manage production for the whole company herd
(given specific criteria), and manage costs and returns for the whole herd in two different
climatic scenarios: normal climatic conditions and in drought.
Semi-structured discussions were conducted with property managers during the playing of the
game to gain insights into the relevance of their current practices related to the use of
production and financial information at each stage of the internal supply chain. Semi-structured
discussions were also conducted with corporate management to ascertain their perceptions of
the degree of shared goals and visions between both levels of management. Such facilitated
discussions were primarily undertaken to promote a degree of formalised reflectiveness which
Ollila (2000) and Raelin (2001) indicate is a key component of learning.
Results, game observations and outcomes
The case study analysis
The case study analysis of ACGC company financial data as found in the monthly company
report is reported in Bryceson and Slaughter (2010), however it showed that overall company
performance as normally assessed by shareholders used metrics covering a number of areas
including profitability, liquidity, financial stability, cash flow and cash sufficiency – i.e. corporate
management is judged on how well they have pulled these issues together to maximise the
market value of owners’ equity. While these metrics are the focus of shareholders and corporate
managers, property managers are detached from them because internal management
accounting measures such as transfer pricing are used to monitor individual property
performance. As a result, the different performance measures used for corporate and
operational management resulted in an incongruence of goals between the two different
components of the company (ACGC senior managers and property managers 2009, pers. comm.
and Bryceson & Slaughter 2010).
While the property managers are highly skilled in operational aspects of running cattle grazing
enterprises, they rarely have the knowledge or skills in classic business technologies such as
commerce and accounting that their equivalent urban-based divisional managers have
(Australian Bureau of Statistics 2006) Therefore, they are often not as proficient in analysing
and utilising corporate management accounting information to support their decision making
activities. This lack of knowledge and understanding of key financial performance indicators had
been identified by senior management as an area where skills need to be upgraded in order to
improve overall corporate performance.
Game Observations
The business simulation game conducted was designed using criteria and management
decisions that property managers make every day using familiar accounting details, thus
creating real and recognisable issues for players to address and ensuring that the point that
Peters et al. (1998) make regarding the importance of ensuring that the validity of the model or
how near to reality the model underpinning the simulation is, has a major impact on the
12
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Research Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
motivation of the players. As the property managers played the game iteratively, it became
apparent that:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
A computer simulation game, however strongly based in real life data and detail, when
played under mildly competitive conditions in teams forced managers out of their comfort
zone and exposed them to unexpected situations in relation to the internal supply chain of
the company.
All the property managers were very experienced and the exercise indicated that they
currently operate well within their comfort zone of management responsibility. However
some property managers struggled when challenged with something that was not within
their current frame of reference. This is not to say that they did not have the ability to
deal with these situations but rather that they were uncomfortable when faced with
business-based challenges because they are not in their normal sphere of operation.
Wenger (2000, p. 233) argues that learning at boundaries like this is likely to be more
effective because experience and competence are in close, generative tension.
The criteria that the property managers typically measure themselves by are the transfer
prices and the actual sale prices received for cattle on individual properties. They are
certainly aware of costs but it appears that they underutilise the Key Performance
Indicators of kilograms (kg) produced and the cost of each kilogram produced. This may
be related to the information they are normally provided with, however, it is important
from a company perspective that they are made to reflect on and report variances in, the
kg produced and costs of production per kg.
In normal circumstances, the internal supply chain of the company was not something
uppermost in a manager’s mind when making decisions on the property they managed.
After playing the game all week the idea of working collaboratively across the three
different types of enterprises to maximise overall corporate outcomes appeared to take
hold. This was demonstrated by the changing results over the week with strategic
individual property level trade-offs being made to improve overall corporate outcomes.
Tables 1a and 1b show examples of the final summary output from the business
simulation game played under normal conditions. Table 1a shows overall company
profitability when each component works independently to maximise the profit of their
individual property/enterprise (a non-integrated approach known as Non Integrated
Autonomy); and Table 1b when each component works towards maximising overall
corporate profitability (an integrated approach known as Integrated Autonomy) (Bryceson
and Slaughter, 2009; Bryceson and Slaughter 2010.
Table 1a. Final summary output from the business exercise run under normal climatic
conditions for a Non-Integrated Autonomy Scenario - Return on Total assets = 3.41%
Table 1b. Final summary output from the business exercise run under normal climatic
conditions for an Integrated Autonomy scenario - Return on Total Assets = 5.99%
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
13
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Research Forum
6.
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
It is clear that the property management teams are very skilled in managing the
operational aspects of their individual properties. However, it was also clear that the
managers have difficulty in articulating the sources of information they use to make
decisions - and the importance of those sources of information. It became apparent very
quickly that there was a very strong reliance on the senior managers such as the General
Manager (Production) and the Chief Financial Officer as sources of information and
decision making guidance. The property managers seemed to be resigned that they will
not make the final decisions regarding the product produced and as such, they believe
that their job is to follow instructions from above. While the higher level management
decisions will ultimately be made by senior management there appears to be a perception
by property managers that their ideas and insights into some of these decisions will not
be valued and are therefore not offered.
Discussion of learning outcomes and conclusions
In the Introduction the issue of whether using a business simulation game both as a learning
environment for enabling individual knowledge acquisition and for enabling that new knowledge
to translate into practical value adding mechanisms for the overall corporate entity, was
discussed.
A key part of achieving good performance across the internal supply chain requires an inbuilt
reflectiveness of actions taken and the impacts of those actions (Bryceson and Slaughter 2010).
An underlying part of this business simulation game was iterative reflective thought and action
combined with facilitated reflective discussions. Gray (2007) makes it clear that a combination
of reflective tools such as those employed in this study provide a process that mediates
between experience and knowledge to provide deep individual learning that can be translated to
organizational value adding by the individuals involved following up such thought processes with
practice or action. In practice, the only evaluation possible of whether an individual “learned”
through playing the business simulation game was to track the results of the teams playing the
simulation game on a daily basis, observe how individual property managers played the game
and discuss with them why certain decisions were made.
Despite the limitations in evaluating individual learning in this way, given the changing game
results over the week, the results suggest that the property managers learnt both about the
need to collaborate across the internal supply chain to improve company performance and that
physically playing the game created a learning environment that facilitated a better
understanding of their role in the supply chain.
To this end, in addition to the standard metrics involved and used in the simulation, property
managers were required to report on variances against budgeted measures as well as their
understanding of the underlying factors affecting their performance outcomes (e.g. seasonal
conditions). Such reporting required managers to reflect on the impacts that their management
decisions have on their own production issues but also on the wider impacts of these decisions
and associated variances on the efficiency of the internal supply chain and subsequently the
effects on overall corporate performance in relation to such factors.
The approach encouraged property managers to focus on factors that influence the designated
corporate KPIs and associated metrics, (in the context of seasonal and market conditions), thus
aligning production goals with corporate goals. This then resulted in the performance of each
stage of the internal supply chain being measured in relation to its contribution to overall
corporate performance. As such ‘balance’ is created between measures of production
performance within the internal supply chain and corporate performance.
Without the business simulation game and its repetitive playing, the knowledge acquisition and
learning noted above would not have taken place. The business simulation game in this
situation fulfilled the goals set for it and at the same time provided some interesting insights
into the long term strategy development opportunities for the company for both property
managers and senior managers alike.
References
Adams E and Rollings A 2006, ‘Fundamentals of game design’, Game Design and Development Series,.
Prentice Hall, London
Anderson PH and Lawton L 1992, ‘A survey of methods used for evaluating student performance on
business simulations’, Simulation and Gaming, 23:490-498.
Anderson PH and Lawton L 1997, ‘Demonstrating the learning effectiveness of simulations: Where we are
and where we need to go’, Developments in Business Simulation and Experiential Learning, 24: 68-73.
Anderson PH and Lawton L 2002, ‘Is simulation performance related to application? An exploratory study’,
Developments in Business Simulation and Experiential Learning, 29,:08-113.
14
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Research Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
Anderson PH and Lawton L 2004, ‘Simulation exercises and problem based learning: Is there a fit?’
Developments in Business Simulation and Experiential Learning, 31,:183-189.
Anderson PH and Lawton L 2009, ‘Business simulations and cognitive learning: developments, Desires and
Future Directions’, Simulation and Gaming, 40(2): 193-216.
Angehrn AA and Nabeth T 1997, ‘Leveraging emerging technologies in management education: research
and experiences’, European Management Journal, 15(3): 275-285.
Australian Bureau of Statistics 2006, - Agriculture in Focus: Farming Families,
Australia,
7104.0.55.001,
Viewed
24th
October
2011,
<http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/[email protected]/Latestproducts/7104.0.55.001Main%20Features32006?ope
ndocument&tabname=Summary&prodno=7104.0.55.001&issue= 2006&num=&view=>
Annetta LA, Cook M and Schultz M 2007, ‘Video games: a vehicle for problem-based learning’, e-JIST,
10(1): October 2007 12p.
Bateman C and Bloom R 2005, '21st Century Game Design', Charles River Media Game Development Series,
, Cengage Delmar Learning, Clifton Park, New York..
Beamon BM and Bermudo JM 2000, ‘A hybrid push/pull control algorithm for multistage, multiline production
systems. Production, Planning and Control, 1(4): 349-356.
Becta 2001, Becta Report on Computer Games in Education, British Educational Communications and
Technology Agency Curriculum Software Initiative: Computer Games in Education Project, viewed 10
September 2009, <http://www.becta.org.uk/research/research.cfm?section=1and id=2826>.
Betz J 1996, ‘Computer Games: Increase learning in an interactive multidisciplinary environment’, Journal of
Educational Technology Systems, 24(2): 195-205.
Brown SJ 1998, ‘Internet technology in support of the concept of "communities-of-practice': The case of
Xerox’, Accounting Management and Information Technologies, 8:227-236.
Bryceson KP 2007, ‘A new model of online teaching and learning based on social constructivism and the
concept of ‘Ba’ as theoretical frameworks’, Learning Environments Research, 10(3): 189-206.
Bryceson KP 2009, VAG – ‘A game of agribusiness supply chain strategy’, Journal of Electronic Commerce
Research, 9: 27-47.
Bryceson KP and Slaughter GJ 2009, ‘Integrated Autonomy - a modelling-based investigation of agrifood
supply chain performance’, in Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Computer Modelling
and Simulation, Transactions of the Computer Society, 25-27 Mar 2009, IEEE, pp. 334-339.
Bryceson KP and Slaughter GJ 2010, ‘Alignment of performance metrics in a multi-enterprise agribusiness:
a case of integrated autonomy?’ International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management,
59(4:325-350
Burns AC, Gentry AC and Wolfe J 1990, ‘A cornucopia of considerations in evaluating the effectiveness of
Experiential Pedagogies’, in JW Gentry (ed.), Guide to Business Gaming and Experiential Learning,:
Nichols/GP Publishing, New York, 25: 3-278.
Christie AA Joye MP and Watts RL 2003, ‘Decentralization of the firm: theory and evidence’ Journal of
Corporate Finance, 9: 3-36.
Collis DJ and Montgomery CA 1997, Corporate Strategy: Resources and the Scope of the Firm. Irwin,
Chicago,.
Cordova DI and Lepper MR 1996,‘Intrinsic motivation and the process of learning: beneficial effects of
contextualization, personalization, and choice’ Journal of Educational Psychology, 88(4):715-730.
Crawford C 1982, The Art of Computer Game Design (out of print), viewed 15 September 2009
<www.vancouver.wsu.edu/fac/peabody/game-book/Coverpage.html>.
Dempsey JV, Lucassen BA , Haynes LL and Casey MS 1997, ’An exploratory study of forty computer games’
COE Technical Report. 97(2). Alabama, USA, University of South Alabama.
Fisher J 1994, ‘Technological interdependence, labor production functions and control systems’ Accounting
Organisations and Society, 19(6): 493-505.
Foss NJ and Christensen JF 1996, ‘A process approach to corporate coherence’ Social Science Research
Network, viewed 9 September 2009, <http://ssrn.com/abstract=70888> DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.70888.
Gosen, J. & Washbush J. (2002) ‘An initial validity investigation of a test investigating total enterprise
simulation learning’, Developments in Business Simulation and Experiential Learning, 28: 92-95.
Gray DE 2007, ‘Facilitating management learning: developing critical reflection through reflective tools’,
Management Learning, 38(5): 495-517.
Handfield RB, Ragatz GL, Petersen KJ, and Monczka RM 1999, ‘Involving suppliers in new product
development’, California Management Review, 42(1): 59-84.
Harrison A and Godsell J 2003, ‘Customer responsive supply chains: an exploratory study of performance
measurement’, Cranfield University Working Paper Series. SWP 1(03), UK. viewed 24 October 2011,
https://dspace.lib.cranfield.ac.uk/bitstream/1826/377/1/SWP0103.pdf
Huin SF, Luong, LHS and Abhary K 2002, ‘Internal supply chain planning determinants in small and medium
sized manufacturers’, International Journal of Physical Distribution and Logistics Management, 32(9):
771-782.
Jayakanthan R 2002,‘Application of computer games in the field of education’ The Electronic Library’, 20(2):
98-102.
Kaplan R and Norton D 2004, Strategy maps: Converting intangible assets into tangible outcomes. Harvard
Business School Press, Boston, MA.
Kirriemuir J and McFarlane A 2004, ‘Literature review in games and learning’, Future Lab Series Report 8.
FutureLab, Bristol, viewed 8 August 2009, <www.futurelab.org.uk/research/lit_reviews.htm>.
Landeros R and Monczka RM 1989, ‘Cooperative buyer/seller relationships and a firm’s competitive posture’,
Journal of Purchasing and Materials Management, 25(3): 9-18.
Laseter TM 1997, ‘To integrate their supply chains, firms must learn how to draw ‘scope boundaries’,
Purchasing, 123(7),:17-20.
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
15
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Research Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
Lean J Moizer JD, Towler M, and Abbey C 2006, ‘Simulations and games: use and barriers in higher
education’ Active Learning in Higher Education, 7(3): 227-242.
Lee HL and Amaral J 2002, ‘Continuous and sustainable improvement through supply chain performance
management’, Stanford Global Supply Chain Management Forum Paper SGSCMF – W1- 2002.
Lynch MA and Tunstall RJ 2008, ‘When worlds collide: developing game-design partnerships in universities’,
Simulation and Gaming, 39(3): 379-398.
Maier FH and Größler A 2000, ‘ What are we talking about?— A taxonomy of computer simulations to
support learning’, System Dynamics Review, 16(2): 135–148.
Malone T 1981, ‘Toward a theory of intrinsically motivating instruction’ ,Cognitive Science, 4: 333-369.
McFarlane A, Sparrowhawk A and Heald Y 2002, ‘Report on the educational use of games’, TEEM (Teachers
Evaluating Educational Multimedia, viewed 12 August 2008, <www.teem.org.uk>.
Ollila S 2000,’Creativity and innovativeness through reflective project leadership’,Reflective Project
Leadership 9(3): 95–200.
Peters V, Vissers V and Heijne G 1998, ‘The validity of games', Simulation and Gaming, 29: 20-30.
Pivec M and Dziabenko O 2004, ‘Game-based learning framework for collaborative learning and student eteamwork’, E-Mentor, 2, DOI 1731-7428.
Prahalad CK and Hamel G 1990, ‘The core competence of the corporation’, Harvard Business Review, MayJune: 79-91.
Prensky M 2001, Digital Game-based Learning, McGraw Hill, New York.
Raelin JA 2001, ‘Public reflection as the basis of learning’, Management Learning, 32(1): 11–30.
Ruohomaki V 1995, ‘Viewpoints on learning and education with simulation games’, in J Riis (ed.), Simulation
Games and Learning in Production Management, Chapman and Hall, London, pp. 13-25.
Salen K and Zimmerman E 2003. Rules of Play: Game Design Fundamentals, MIT Press, Boston.
Seay J 1997, Education and Simulation/Gaming and Computers. Viewed 8 December 2009,
<http://spinner.cofc.edu/~seay/cb/simgames.html>.
Simons R 2005, Levers of Organization Design: How Managers Use Accountability Systems for Greater
Performance and Commitment,. Harvard Business School Press, Boston.
Spender JC 1993, ‘Competitive advantage from tacit knowledge? Unpacking the concept and its strategic
implications’, in Academy of Management Proceedings, Best Paper Series, pp. 37—41, Atlanta, August 8.
Spender JC 1996, Making Knowledge the Basis of a Dynamic Theory of the Firm, Strategic Management
Journal, 17: 45-62
Spender JC 2008, ‘Organizational learning and knowledge management: whence and whither?’,
Management Learning, 39(2): 159 -176.
Starbuck W, Hedberg B, Meinolf D, Antal AB, Child J and Nonaka I 2001, ‘How organizations learn from
success and failure’, in M Dierkes, Antal, AB, Child, J., Nonaka, I Handbook of Organizational Learning
and Knowledge, Part III, University Press, New York, pp.308-327.
Stewart V, Marsh S, Kingwell R, Pannell D, Abadi A, and Schilizzi S 2000,’Computer games and fun in
farmiing systems education? A case study’, The Journal of Agricultural education and extension, 7(2),
117-128
Tsoukas H and Mylonopoulos N 2004, ‘Introduction: knowledge construction and creation in organisations’,
British Journal of Management, 15(1), S1-S8.
Van Helden JG, van der Meer-Kooistra J and Scapens RW 2001, ’Co-Ordination of internal transactions at
Hoogovens steel: struggling with the tension between performance-oriented business units and the
concept of an integrated company’, Management Accounting Research, 12: 357-386.
Vogel JJ, Vogel DS, Cannon-Bowers J, Bowers CA, Muse K and Wright M 2006, ’Computer gaming and
interactive simulations for learning: a meta-analysis’, Journal of Educational Computing Research, 34(3):
229-243.
Vygotsky LS 1978, , ‘The Role of Play in Development’, in M Cole, John-Steiner V, Scribner S and
Souberman E (eds), ’Mind in Society: The development of higher psychological processes': Harvard
University Press Cambridge, MA,. pp. 92-104.
Wells G 1999, Dialogic Inquiry: Towards a Sociocultural Practice and Theory of Education, Cambridge
University Press, New York.
Wenger E 2000, ‘Communities of practice and learning systems’, Organization, Volume 7, Number 2: 225246.
White RE 1986, ‘Generic business strategies, organisational context and performance: an empirical
investigation’, Strategic Management Journal, 7(3): 217-231.
Whyte W 1989, ‘Advancing scientific knowledge through participatory action research’ Sociological Forum,
4(3): 367-385.
Wilson KA, Bedwell WL, Lazzara EH Salas E, Burke CS, Estock JL, Orvis KL, and Conkey C, 2009,
‘Relationships between game attributes and learning outcomes: review and research proposals’,
Simulation and Gaming, 40(2): 217-266.
Yin R 2002, ‘Case Study Research: Design and Method’, (3rd ed), Thousand Oaks, Sage Publications.
16
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
Engaging the community in biosecurity issues
Heleen Kruger
Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics & Sciences, GPO Box 1563 CANBERRA ACT 2601
Email: [email protected]
Abstract. Protecting the economy, environment and people’s lifestyles from pests, weeds and
diseases (i.e. biosecurity) is a costly, but important endeavour. Biosecurity is increasingly
acknowledged as the responsibility of not only government and industry, but also the
community. The Engaging in Biosecurity (EiB) project developed guidelines to engage the
community in biosecurity based on learnings from six profiling studies and four trial
implementation projects. A theoretical framework was developed to help engagement
practitioners engage communities effectively by developing partnerships in formation, design
and implementation of biosecurity engagement projects. The framework also involves a
monitoring and evaluation component to ensure continual improvement of biosecurity
engagement projects. It enables early identification of, and response to, issues and new
opportunities. This paper provides an overview of the EiB project’s theoretical framework,
including the M&E component, with real examples.
Keywords: Public participation, monitoring and evaluation, pest and disease management,
engagement principles.
Substantial investment from government, industry and research bodies has led to significant
progress in understanding pest behaviour and control, as well as surveillance, detection and
eradication techniques. To be successful, however, these operational activities need concurrent
changes in community awareness, decision-making and behaviour.
The Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics and Sciences (ABARES)
developed a proposed national framework for engaging the community about biosecurity issues
through the Engaging in Biosecurity (EiB) project. A key component of the framework is a set of
biosecurity engagement guidelines to provide direction and practical tips for effective biosecurity
engagement. This paper provides a brief overview of the key elements in the guidelines.
Community engagement is typically defined along a continuum of participation, ranging from
passive receipt of information (brochures, manuals and web pages), consultation, involvement,
partnerships, through to self-empowered communities that independently initiate actions.
The approach outlined in the guidelines acknowledges the wide range of circumstances in which
biosecurity engagement operates in terms of local context, available resources and diverse
stakeholders. It offers a best practice approach to strategically plan and implement biosecurity
engagement programs and projects, rather than a ‘quick-fix recipe’.
The Office of the Chief Plant Protection Officer, within the Australian Government Department of
Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, commissioned this work.
Methods
During 2009, ABARES social scientists profiled six existing biosecurity engagement programs to
identify what hinders and facilitates effective community engagement on biosecurity issues in
different contexts. During 2010 and 2011, four biosecurity engagement trials were conducted
focusing on either, monitoring and evaluating biosecurity engagement programs, or involving
volunteers to help address biosecurity issues. Data were analysed using the proprietary
qualitative data analysis tool NVivo.
To develop guidelines to monitor and evaluate (M&E) biosecurity engagement programs, an
approach called monitoring, evaluation, reporting and improvement (MERI) was adjusted to fit
the biosecurity engagement context.
Findings and discussion
Basic principles for biosecurity engagement
A key finding was that biosecurity engagement programs need a high level of flexibility and
adaptive management in order to respond to community needs and expectations. For
engagement programs to be effective they need feedback loops to enable responsiveness to
target and stakeholder groups and to ensure the program stays on track.
Engagement programs involve a range of decision-making processes at various levels and
different stages. Different representatives of stakeholder agencies need to be engaged at
different stages to involve the best people for the decisions at hand.
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
17
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
Biosecurity engagement ‘engine’
The biosecurity engagement engine provides a metaphor for an ideal engagement process.
Three cogged wheels represent different stages of an engagement program. Each wheel
influences and provides feedback to the other wheels, so they are constantly being moved to
action by the others. The biosecurity engagement engine illustrates that engagement programs
need to involve responsive processes to realise their full potential.
Figure 1. Biosecurity engagement engine
The length of each stage is variable and could overlap. The stages are:



Formation—determining program goals, management and resourcing. This includes
problem scoping in collaboration with stakeholders, for example, key issues, main
pathways through which the pest could spread and ways to address risks. The decisions
required for this stage would ideally involve people who have authority to allocate
resources and have an overview of how the planned venture would relate to other
programs and organisational goals.
Design—identifying key target groups for addressing biosecurity risks and practical,
effective ways to engage them. It requires insight into target group attitudes, motivations
and capacities by gathering baseline information and developing an engagement strategy
based on this information. People with a good understanding of what messages and
engagement activities would work best with target groups at grassroots level need to be
involved.
Implementation—interacting with target groups to reduce biosecurity risks including
responding to new challenges and opportunities. This stage might require collaboration
with intermediaries or representatives of target groups; for communities intermediaries
could be key respected figures, for farmers they could be on-farm consultants with whom
farmers have an established relationship.
Monitoring and evaluation stages provide feedback from the implementation and design stages
to allow for adaptive program management. The engagement strategy is regularly updated
based on monitoring information that provides insight into how target group engagement could
be strengthened. Dialogue and reporting ensure communication of ‘big picture’ information
between stakeholders during design and formation.
18
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
Considerations when engaging stakeholders or target groups
When engaging any stakeholders or target groups the following need to be considered:





The goal of engagement (Why?)—to be clear on what is needed from the
stakeholder/target group, i.e. requesting partnership, feedback, behavioural change or
raising awareness.
The messenger (Who?)—to channel information through the most appropriate person or
organisation that has the respect and trust of the stakeholder or target group. This might
require intermediaries to be involved.
The message (What?)—tailor messages for each stakeholder or target group based on
their needs, i.e. ‘what’s in it for me?’ and demonstrate that their support will make a
difference.
The timing (When?)—engage people at a time convenient for them and make the
engagement time-effective. For example, meetings could be held in conjunction with
other events that involve the relevant stakeholder or target groups.
The tools (How?)—identify engagement activities that would resonate with the
stakeholder or target group; for example, a ‘shed meeting’ might be better for farmers
than a formal meeting. Face-to-face contact works best and be careful not to rely solely
on printed material.
Need for baseline information
It is important to understand target and stakeholder groups to tailor the engagement to their
needs and determine their need for capacity building. Gathering baseline information provides
insight into target and stakeholder groups’:



Knowledge and skills (‘know how’)—awareness, recognition and understanding of the
science and management practices that relate to particular pests, as well as the goals,
opportunities and limitations of the engagement process.
Motivation (‘want to’)—commitment and aspirations of individuals, communities and
agencies to address pest problems, which is strongly related to their personal and
collective priorities.
Resources (‘can do’)—capacity to engage in terms of finances, time and staff.
Social enablers
The research identified several key ‘social enablers’ (i.e. how the engager and target groups
relate to each other or the cause) that contribute to the engagement program’s success. They
include:








Trust—to promote sharing, openness and understanding. Factors that could strengthen
trust include long-term relationships, responsiveness, commitment and social
interactions. Factors undermining trust include incorrect advice, lack of transparency, and
staff changes.
Responsiveness—to respond to stakeholder and target group needs. It demonstrates that
their support and involvement are valued and that the cause is of high priority.
Community ‘champions’—people who have the ability to encourage and inspire others to
support a cause. They can also contribute to developing trust and credibility between
groups. Champions often have the trust and ‘speak the language’ of the target group.
‘Piggyback’ biosecurity messages—biosecurity may not be ‘on people’s radar’, especially if
no threat is imminent. Biosecurity messages could be communicated by linking them to
other more interesting activities or issues.
Sense of community/place—could provide a trigger for people to become involved. For
example, if residents view horticultural growers as an important part of the wider regional
society and economy, they may be motivated to protect the industry.
Convenience—timing, format and venue of engagement activities should be tailored for
intended participants. ‘Doing the right thing’ should be as easy as possible for target
groups.
Commitment—long-term commitment from government, industry and community groups
is necessary for lasting change, despite setbacks or challenges. Commitment is
demonstrated through provision of tangible resources such as funding, staff and other
forms of support, as well as intangible assets such as sustained focus and dedication.
Accountability—confidence is engendered when partners are willing to accept
responsibility and account for their actions rather than avoid responsibility.
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
19
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
A suggested approach to develop a biosecurity engagement program
The principles described below have been modified from the MERI approach and provide a good
foundation for developing a monitoring and evaluation component. The MERI framework has
been condensed to allow for the short timeframes that are typical of most current biosecurity
engagement programs.
The framework requires development of a ‘theory of change’ identifying the ‘cause and effect’
relationship between (i) the program objective (what would success look like?) and (ii)
engagement activities. Once the objective and activities have been identified there is a need to:


Analyse activities—articulate what outcomes each activity sets out to deliver and whether
the combined outcomes of the different activities will lead to the program objective being
achieved. Consider how planned activities could be strengthened.
Articulate assumptions—the link between an activity and its expected outcome is normally
based on assumptions. If assumptions are articulated, engagement activities can be finetuned and the strategy can be adjusted if necessary. For example, if the engagement
activity is to do a letterbox drop of pamphlets asking householders to maintain their fruit
trees, there is an assumption that householders will read and respond to the information.
Key principles for developing biosecurity engagement program monitoring and
evaluation
The distinction between ‘monitoring’ and ‘evaluation’ (M&E) is often blurred as each could
overlap in several ways. For the purpose of this document monitoring and evaluation mean:


Monitoring is a process that keeps track of the progress of an engagement strategy
against what it intends to achieve, including whether engagement activities are having
the intended effect; how they could be improved and whether there are unintended
outcomes. The audience for monitoring findings is normally the engagement program
team.
Evaluation is a snapshot of the impact of activities and identifies the extent to which
objectives have been achieved. It involves making judgements about how ‘good’ an
intervention has been at achieving outcomes. It normally involves formal reporting for
external stakeholders, such as funders and other interested parties, toward the end of the
project.
M&E as a distinct process generally does not feature strongly in biosecurity engagement
programs unless needed to fulfil contractual obligations.
As adaptive management is key to effective engagement it is important to purposefully gather
data to inform decision making with evidence about what works and does not. It is fundamental
that the information gathered is meaningful to the project team. A biosecurity engagement
program’s M&E component could therefore be rather ‘home-grown’ and evolving in order to best
meet the engagement program team’s needs.
Principles that relate to developing a monitoring process within the context of an established
‘theory of change’ are:


Define the focus of the monitoring activities—develop a key monitoring question with a
number of sub-questions that capture the information needs of the engagement program
team to ensure the program stays on track.
Identify indicators of expected intermediate outcomes—determine what signs or
indicators will provide evidence of progress. The medium-term results of the program’s
implementation lifetime (intermediate outcomes) are best suited, that is, signs that
people are becoming more engaged. If the program is not on track at this point it is not
too late to change course. Indicators could be (i) tangible—people are starting to ‘do the
right thing’ such as strengthening on-farm hygiene or reporting suspected pests, or (ii)
intangible—positive changes in target group awareness and attitude toward ‘doing the
right thing’. The outcomes identified for each activity will provide clues to what would be
suitable indicators.
The principle for designing an evaluation approach is similar to that of monitoring; the
evaluation needs to be focused by identifying key evaluation questions and determining what
indicators will provide evidence of achievement. Again, both tangible and intangible evidence
need to be identified. One would think that the simplest way to conduct an evaluation would be
to demonstrate that x per cent of the target group is ‘doing the right thing’. However, the
opportunity to do the right thing might not have presented itself, especially in the biosecurity
context. For example, if the community is asked to report sightings of a certain pest and the
20
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
pest is present in very low numbers, numbers reported would consequently be very low. The
community’s ‘readiness’ to report also needs to be determined by, for example, assessing its
awareness of the pest, what to look for and how to report sightings.
Figure 2 gives an overview of how the suggested processes for developing and implementing a
biosecurity engagement program fit together.
Ensure
mutual
learning
between
programs
Respond to
needs of
engagement
program as
required
Communicate external
changes, e.g. to
market access
requirements,
regulations,
Instigate biosecurity
engagement program
by providing resources,
broad goals and
guidance
FORMATION
Figure 2. Overview of processes involved in biosecurity engagement engine
Identify/Refine the
engagement program's
objective(s)
Identify/Reconsider
target groups and
intermediaries, incl. key
messages
Identify necessary
changes to
engagement strategy
and M&E process
M&E
process
Analyse M&E data
Identify engagement
activities
Analyse and prioritise
engagement activities
incl. articulating
assumptions
Identify M&E process,
i.e. key questions,
indicators and activities
Implement engagement
strategy and M&E
activities
IMPLEMENTATION
Report relevant
findings and program
needs to different
stakeholders
DESIGN
Dialogue and reporting process
Conclusions
Biosecurity is a costly and complex issue. Addressing it optimally requires shared responsibility
between stakeholders, including government, industry and the community. The Engaging in
Biosecurity project found that effective community engagement with biosecurity issues needs a
tailored approach based on target and stakeholder group needs, aspirations and capabilities,
and by working through social enablers, such as trust and responsiveness. Well-designed
monitoring and evaluation processes tailored to engagement team needs could ensure adaptive
program management, a vital element to biosecurity engagement programs.
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
21
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
Hawkesbury Harvest – a multifunctional agriculture model for
regional rural development
David Mason
NSW Department of Primary Industries, Locked Bag 4, Richmond, NSW 2753
Email: [email protected]
Abstract. Across Australia there is growing policy emphasis on developing the resilience
capacity of farmers, farming families and rural communities to deal with increasing climate
and economic variability and uncertainty. Innovative ideas and concepts arise out of concern
for the future of things people think is important to their quality of life. One such concept that
has been developing as part of Sydney’s landuse and food culture is Hawkesbury Harvest.
Hawkesbury Harvest, which began in 2000 as a raw agritourism product, offering 13
destinations in the Hawkesbury Shire, has been evolving as a multifunctional agriculture
development mechanism that now extends right around the Sydney Basin and down into the
Illawarra region. This paper proposes that the Hawkesbury Harvest model has something to
offer to rural NSW for developing resilience capacity. This is being recognised and is currently
being acted upon by Regional Development Australia Southern Inland.
Keywords: uncertainty, innovation, multifunctional, resilience, capacity
Introduction
It is my intention in this paper to provoke serious thought about the concept of multifunctional
agriculture as a mechanism for increasing the viability and sustainability of small family farms in
the context of increasing climate and economic variability and associated uncertainty and the
changing drought assistance policy emphasis of government. In so doing I propose that the
peri-urban Hawkesbury Harvest multifunctional model has application to rural NSW as a
mechanism to increase family farm income and associated rural business income.
Multifunctionality or multifunctional agriculture are terms used to indicate generally that
agriculture can produce various non-commodity outputs in addition to food. The working
definition of multifunctionality used by the OECD (OECD 2000) associates multifunctionality with
particular characteristics of the agricultural production process and its outputs:


the existence of multiple commodity and non-commodity outputs that are jointly
produced by agriculture; and
some of the non-commodity outputs may exhibit the characteristics of externalities or
public good, such that markets for these goods function poorly or are nonexistent.
The concept is based on the idea that agriculture has many functions in addition to producing
food and fibre including environmental protection, landscape preservation, rural employment,
community development, human health rehabilitation, value-adding, regional branding,
agritourism and education (OECD 2000)
The NSW rural situation
Climate and economic environments
NSW farmers, farming families and associated rural communities have just emerged from an
eight year drought, beginning in 2002 and ending in 2010. This was the third such drought in
NSW in the past 115 years with the other two being from 1895 to 1902 and from 1934 to 1942
(Wilkinson 2005). As those rural sectors emerge from this drought, the Australian agriculture
industry is faced with a volatile AU$ that some have predicted could achieve an exchange rate
of US$1.50 – not an encouraging prospect for an industry which is substantially export oriented
with exports in recent years generally comprising some 60 per cent of agricultural production
(Roberts et al. 2008).
The uncertainty for farmers associated with a fluctuating AU$ is not helped by the variation of
opinion. On one hand the National Farmers Federation is saying the nation’s farm income is
slashed by $220 million for every 1% the AU$ rises (McElhone 2011). On the other the National
Australia Bank is saying agricultural exports will jump to $32.2 billion in 2011-12 up 3.4 per
cent on the previous financial year despite the high AU$ (Kondinin Group 2011). The same
applies to the variation of opinion by economists and other industry experts on which way
interest rates will go.
Government policy
A further challenge for the farming community is that State and Federal drought assistance
policy has been changing with increasing emphasis on encouraging primary producers to
22
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
become self reliant in managing climate variability. This began in 1993 with the Keating
government implementing the Farming for the Future Program which had a technological and
skills based focus.
In 2004, as the Howard Government moved towards a more inclusive approach – a human
welfare and social resource development component was added to drought support policy to
balance the technological and skills focus (Wilkinson 2005). From 2005, as the drought
deepened, there was an increase in the federal and state government’s funding for rural mental
health programs as a further expression of this policy.
In 2010 the Rudd Government in partnership with the Western Australian Government
implemented a one year Drought Pilot designed to move farmers from a crisis management
approach to risk management. The aim of this pilot was to better support farmers, their families
and rural communities in preparing for future challenges, rather than waiting until they are in
crisis to offer assistance (NSW RAA 2010). The pilot focus was on on-farm technological
development through whole farm strategic planning. Other relevant components included the
development of community social capital and networks and farm social support to meet the
mental health, counselling and social needs of farming families.
The intent of this trend over time and the Western Australian pilot is clear – farmers, farming
families and rural communities are going to have to become more self reliant and resilient to
meet the climate and economic challenges. This requires the development of capacity not just
at a technological level but also at a human resource level – a level where people can cope with
the situation confronting them mentally, emotionally and even spiritually as well as
technologically.
The NSW Government recognised this interdependent relationship between technological
development and human resource development when it transformed its Drought Support
Worker Program to the Rural Support Worker Program within the Department of Industry &
Investment’s Division of Primary Industries at the end of the drought mid 2010.
Farm size and financial performance
Research (Hooper et al 2002) has demonstrated that as at the beginning of the 2002-2010
drought:




Ownership of Australian farms was dominated by family businesses.
Since 1961 the number of ‘sub-commercial’ farms (ABS estimated value of agricultural
operations between $5,000 and $22,499) increased to 33,674 establishments occupying
16.6 million hectares of land contributing less than 5% to the gross value of agricultural
production. Most of these farms are located in the high rainfall zone near urban locations.
Typically families operating or residing on these establishments derive the majority of
their income from off-farm or non-farming activities.
Since 1961 the number of ‘commercial’ farms (ABS estimated value of agricultural
operations of $22,500 or more) diminished from 200,000 to just over 111,000 in 2000
with the average area of a commercial farm increasing from 2,800 hectares to 4,100
hectares. These farms are loosely classed as broadacre farms where the majority of
income is from on-farm activities
The bottom third of the broadacre farms (small farms) yielded an average rate of return
between 1990 and 2000 for:
Wheat and other crops:
Mixed livestock/crops:
Sheep:
Beef:
Sheep/beef:

The middle third of the broadacre farms (medium farms) yielded an average rate of
return between 1990 and 2000 for:
Wheat and other crops:
Mixed livestock/crops:
Sheep:
Beef:
Sheep/beef:

+0.6% with the top 25% of the group yielding 8.5%
-2.6% with the top 25% of the group yielding 3.1%
-4.1% with the top 25% of the group yielding 2.2%
-3.8% with the top 25% of the group yielding 1.3%
-4.7% with the top 25% of the group yielding 1.7%
+3.7% with the top 25% of the group yielding 12.6%
-0.1% with the top 25% of the group yielding 5.2%
-2.0% with the top 25% of the group yielding 3.5%
-1.5% with the top 25% of the group yielding 2.6%
-1.5% with the top 25% of the group yielding 4.0%
The top third of farms (large farms) had a positive average rate of return in all categories.
Within the small and medium farm groups it is reasonable to assume there are a significant
number of broadacre family farms that were not viable in the decade to 2000 and this was
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
23
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
before the eight year drought. One option to contribute to the viability of these farms is to
undertake activities that will bring urban income directly onto farms. The mechanism for
consideration is multifunctional agriculture.
Multifunctional agriculture
In Europe, free trade and the cost/price squeeze of agricultural production coupled with the
impact of rapid urbanisation and its effect on the availability and cost of agricultural land and
thus size of farms are drivers for change in the agriculture sector.
This is demonstrated by the transition of agriculture from the post World War II modernisation
era to the new era of rural development in which agriculture is seen and dealt with as part of a
mix of disciplines and stakeholders in the rural environment. The Europeans refer to this
transition as multifunctionality (Mason 2006). Examples of off farm income that brings urban
capital into rural areas include:
Agritourism
Injury rehabilitation
Organics
Carbon offsets
Bird watching
Fishing/ aquaculture
Education – bread, cheese,
yoghurt making
Bookkeeping services
Craft cooperatives
Business training
Data processing
Art schools
Eco tourism
Horse riding trails
Direct marketing – farmers
markets, box deliveries
Selling farm practices
Internet marketing
Value adding farm produce
Green energy
Walking trails
Yabbie farming
Race horse/horse agistment
Cluster
development
–
regional branding
Youth rehabilitation
In Australia there has been a similar drift that has yet to be associated with the concept of
multifunctionality and not necessarily for all the same reasons as has been the case in Europe.
One such example of this is Hawkesbury Harvest.
Hawkesbury Harvest
Hawkesbury Harvest Inc was formed in 2000 in response to concerns related to the impact of:



Sydney’s urban sprawl on farming lands and associated rural and ethnic communities
the supermarket system on price equity and the viability of small family farms
the fast food system on human health particularly the young.
Hawkesbury Harvest’s genesis was the result of the intersection of global, regional and local
forces in regard to food, farming and human health. The outcomes of the United Nations Rio de
Janeiro Conference of 1992 provided the global force where the concepts of sustainability and
economic development were articulated and codified in the Brundtland Report and the Agenda
21 program. The Healthy Cities program that developed out of this, represented by the
Hawkesbury Food Program became the local institutional context for making the arguments
about food, farming and health in the Sydney Basin.
The ‘Strategic Plan for Sustainable Agriculture – Sydney region’, released by the NSW Minister
for Agriculture in May 1998, provided the regional force. This strategy was the result of a five
year community/industry/government consultation process facilitated by the NSW Department
of Primary Industries. During this time it was established there was significant interest in the
retention of agriculture in the Sydney Basin for a range of social, economic and environmental
benefits and reasons.
The third and vital force that was to combine with the global and regional elements to provide
the ideal circumstances for Hawkesbury Harvest’s germination was provided at the local level
through the community surveys that Hawkesbury City Council had undertaken during the 1990s
(again verified in 2007). The purpose of these surveys was to determine what its constituents
valued most about living in the Hawkesbury local government area (LGA). In the overall
responses to those surveys the highest priority value was the lifestyle offered by the rural
landscape of the LGA. People were beginning to make the connection between rural landscape
and sustainable agriculture.
These were the reasons Hawkesbury Harvest began. Articulating those reasons has contributed
to the on-going success of the organisation. Part of the challenge to developing mechanisms
that will contribute to on-farm viability, sustainable development, capacity building and
associated community development is to identify the forces that are impacting on farming and
associated rural communities at the local or regional levels. This then provides a context in
which the knowledge, creativity and energy of people can be captured providing the grass roots
input required for commitment to dealing with the situation, the process and its outcomes.
24
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
Outcomes
The 7th edition of the Hawkesbury Harvest map (Figure 1) was released in July 2011. It
comprises approximately 60 farm based experiences and 20 complementary hospitality
experiences. These extend from the mouth of the Hawkesbury River at Broken Bay right around
the perimeter of Sydney and now down into the Illawarra. The map is segmented into five place
based agritourism experiences – Sydney Hills to Brooklyn Harvest Experience, the Original
Hawkesbury Harvest Experience, Penrith Valley Harvest Experience, Wollondilly Harvest
Experience, and the South Coast Harvest Experience. This is a far cry from the first A4 single
page three colour map printed off on a home printer in 2000 consisting of 13 raw destinations in
the Hawkesbury LGA. Tens of thousands of people visit the Farm Gate Trail each year.
Figure 1. Hawkesbury Harvest map
The Hawkesbury Harvest brand is establishing itself to represent fresh and local food in the
context of the 160 kilometre (100 mile) radius from the centre of Sydney. One of its commercial
members, Pepes Ducks Pty Ltd uses the Hawkesbury Harvest brand on the packaging of its
Grimaud Duck to indicate the product is fresh and grown in the Sydney region. Each Farm Gate
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
25
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
Trail destination has the Hawkesbury Harvest logo displayed in a prominent position. The
Hawkesbury Harvest board is giving consideration to ‘health’ being promoted overtly with the
‘fresh and local’ theme.
Hawkesbury Harvest acts as a business incubator. A prime example of this is Kurrajong Native
Foods. The owner of this very successful local business, Lee Etherington began with Hawkesbury
Harvest in 2000 providing an eco-tourism experience at Kurrajong Heights. One tour group
came across a native tree in fruit and it was suggested that the fruit be made into a jam. This
resulted in Lee Etherington developing a range of native food products to sell through the
Farmers Market system.
So successful was this move that Lee Etherington had to pull out of the eco-tourism business.
Also so successful was the products he was selling in the Farmers Markets that he began to get
enquiries from all around Australia and then from overseas. The export side of his business
became mainly centred on the native hibiscus product that is added to a glass of champagne to
provide flavour and visual effect. The demand was such that he had to pull out of the Farmers
Market system to concentrate on the development of this aspect of his business. The Kurrajong
Native Foods hibiscus can be found in a great many major airport and quality food outlets
around the world.
Hawkesbury Harvest has played a significant role in the development of the pick-your-own
operations on-farm around Sydney. Two chestnut and walnut farms at Mt Irvine in the Blue
Mountains can have more than 1000 people picking nuts on a weekend during the season.
Virtually the entire crop is harvested by pick-your-own. One apple orchardist at Bilpin estimates
that 40% of his crop is harvested in this manner and the balance of the crop is sold through his
farm gate shed.
Other mechanisms developed by Hawkesbury Harvest to bring urban income onto farms and
associated hospitality industries include Farmers and Fine Food Markets, Open Farm Days,
Special Events and Slow Food activities.
Regional application
At a practical level something is happening at the regional NSW level. Regional Development
Australia Southern Inland is currently referring to the Hawkesbury Harvest model in its quest to
establish an agritourism experience across the region. The main towns involved are Young,
Boorowa, Harden, Yass, Gundagai, Tumut, Batlow and Tumbarumba with other towns under
consideration.
Southern NSW Harvest Inc has been created and a constitution developed. It is envisaged this
will provide the umbrella organisation, as is the case with Hawkesbury Harvest Inc, under which
a number of place based experiences can be offered such as Poachers Way experience near
Yass, and Hilltops experience based on the towns of Young Boorowa and Harden. This is the first
step in tapping into the many benefits that the concept of multifunctional agriculture has to
offer. There is still a way to go but there is a work in progress.
References:
Hooper S, Martin P, Love G and Fisher B 2002, ‘Get big or get out - Is this mantra still appropriate for the
new century?’, Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics, 24th Biennial Conference of the
Australian Society of Animal production, Adelaide, 11 July 2002.
Kondinin
Group
2011,
‘High
dollar
fails
to
dampen
agriculture
exports’,
http://www.kondiningroup.com.au/storyview.asp?storyid=2392642&sectionsource=s588049McElhone,
C.,
2011,
Weekly
Times
Now,
20
July
2011
http://www.weeklytimesnow.com.au/article/2011/07/20/359441_print_friendly_article.html. June 2011
Mason D 2006, Urban agriculture – ‘To identify how sustainable urban agriculture can benefit the quality of
life of Australian communities’, Report to the Winston Churchill Memorial Trust of Australia.
NSW Rural Assistance Authority 2010, ‘Pilot of Drought Reform Measures in Western Australia’.
OECD 2000, Agricultural Policies in OECD Countries: Monitoring and Evaluation 2000: Glossary of
Agricultural Policy Terms, OECD.
Roberts I, Haseltine C, Maliyasena A 2008, ‘Factors affecting Australian Agricultural exports’, ABARE Issues
Insights.
Wilkinson J, 2005, ‘Rural Assistance Schemes and Programs’, NSW Parliament Library Research Service
Briefing Paper 8/05.
26
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
Participatory rural video centre in fostering women’s voices- A
model from Bangladesh
MA Sarker1, AH Chowdhury2, MAM Miah3, MK Aurangozeb4, and FA Peloschek5
1
Associate Professor, Department of Agricultural Extension Education(DAEE), Bangladesh Agricultural
University (BAU), Mymensingh-2202, Bangladesh
2
Centre for Development Research (CDR), University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Austria
mailto:3 Professor, DAEE, BAU, Mymensingh-2202, Bangladesh
4
Assistant Director, RDA, Bogra, Bangladesh
5
CDR, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Austria.
Email: [email protected]
Keywords:
extension.
Sustainable
agriculture,
participatory
research,
video,
farmer-to-farmer
Introduction
Bangladesh is an agrarian country in South-Asia with 160 million people (BBS 2010).
Sustainability of the agricultural system, poverty and food security is of great concern. The
Department of Agricultural Extension (DAE) is the leading organization in Bangladesh for
promoting the latest agricultural technologies among the farming community in order to ensure
sustainable agricultural growth. The New Agricultural Extension Policy (NAEP) targeting
“Integrated Environmental Support” was adopted by the DAE. This initiative was taken by DAE
to protect against the environmental degradation caused by agro-chemicals used in agriculture.
However, total consumption of chemical fertilizers has increased by 30% and consumption of
pesticides has doubled in the last two decades (MoA 2009). This indicates that creative and
innovative ways to are needed to support farmer to farmer learning.
Although participatory methodologies such as participatory learning and action research (PLAR)
and FFS are effective in enabling learning between farmers, testing and modifying technologies,
and building social cohesion, scaling out learning outcomes beyond the pilot scale and reaching
out to rural poor and women remain a key challenge (Braun et al. 2006).
In Bangladesh women have less influence in decision-making about farming issues and men
usually take over the economically viable farming activities (Al-Amin et al. 2004). Staff of
agricultural extension services are mainly men, and agricultural development interventions are
often male biased (Van den Ban & Samanta 2006; Chowdhury 2010). As a consequence,
networks of women are very weak and they have limited access to information, technologies,
services, and markets. Local, national and international partners and farmer communities
contributed to develop an approach for creative use of videos in stimulating farmer-to-farmer
learning. The Poverty Elimination Through Rice Research Assistance (PETRRA) project
introduced a video mediated learning approach in combination with participatory learning and
action research (PLAR) and FFS to disseminate rice seed production and preservation
technologies through women-to-women extension in Bangladesh. Observing this success story
of women-to-women extension of PETRRA project in Bangladesh, DAEE and CDR jointly
undertook a project of video-mediated learning to enhance household food security of the rural
poor and women. Following a normative review of concepts and evidence we described a model
of participatory video (PV) supported women farmers’ capacity building process for homestead
crop and seed production.
Farmers’ Learning through Participatory Videos
Video is not a new medium in agricultural extension activities in Bangladesh, however, the idea
of participatory video (PV) is new. The use of video has been in the mass media (e.g. TV) and in
classroom training material (DAE 1999). According to Huber (1999), “PV refers to a bundle of
alternative applications of video technology in development projects. Its goal is to bring about
social change. PV has two broad elements, one is the product (the finished tape or disc) and
another is the process of developing the product. Mainstream PV practitioners usually (Lunch &
Lunch 2006) value the process over the product. Process goal is to enhance capacity of group to
articulate their own problems and potentials, using video as the central media (Figure 1).
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
27
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
Figure 1. PV process in a nutshell
Development of personal skills of the community and other interested actors to use the
technology
Identification of the facilitators who view their role as that of ‘co-learner’
Improving relations and identifying the development problems through engaging in dialogue
with the participants and using participatory tools adapted to the context
Short video and messages prepared and filmed with and by the participants
Daily screening of footage with the community
Adopting a community-led learning, sharing and exchange motion
Completed films can serve as a basis for awareness and exchange between various different
target groups
Source: Lunch & Lunch (2006)
A key element of PV is to involve local farmers in content generation. Farmers and facilitators
identify local knowledge and/ or innovations having regional relevance through participatory
research activities. Rural men and women play an active role in identifying ideas, principles of
technologies and in preparing the script, featuring in the video and validating the final content.
As the ‘zooming-in’ progresses, so starts the ‘zooming-out’ with the organization of video
mediated group learning sessions in multiple villages (Figure 2).
Figure 2. Zooming in zooming out: a new approach for developing video and learning
tools to scale out sustainable agricultural innovations
Source: Adapted from: Van Mele, 2006 and Zossou et al., 2009
PV centre in fostering women voices: A model of improving capacity
This section describes an action research initiative for enhancing food security by enabling
women farmers to learn about homestead-based crop production. The three year project from
CDR, was called ‘Fostering women voices through videos’ (FWVV).
The project has been implemented in the northeast and north-west region of Bangladesh in
collaboration with the Department of Agricultural Extension Education (DAEE) of Bangladesh
Agricultural University (BAU) since 2010. DAEE works with another partner Rural Development
Academy (RDA) to implement the project in the north-west. In this project we intend to
implement a model (Figure 3). Participatory rural video centre (PV centre) is the backbone of
the model. The PV team is to be comprised of at least six members. The PV centre in Kamarpara
village, Sajahanpur, Bogra district has been managed by a group of rural men and women since
March, 2010.
Factors in selecting members included, gender (half of the members are women), interest in
innovation and creativity, close relation and extended network with farming communities in the
area, passion for learning, time for voluntary work. In this model we define the team members
as the PV team. Although the project focus is on women, findings indicate that both
smallholders’ men and women become associates of the centre. The household is a unit where
bargaining and negotiation takes place between men and women. Therefore, it is necessary to
involve (either as in executive committee or as associates) both members. In this model we
define associates (men and women farmers in the community) as the PV community.
28
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
Figure 3. Model of PV supported women farmers’ capacity building approach in
Bangladesh
Management structure of the PV centre
The management structure of the PV centre is as follows:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Coordinator: Coordinates overall activities of the centre, including video, and farmers’
participatory research.
Assistant coordinator: Assists coordinator for performing his/her functions.
Secretary: Maintains documentation of the activities of the centre, day-to-day bookkeeping, and serves communication between the project team and rural community,
especially women.
Research manager: Oversees participatory research activities, assists office secretary to
perform his/her functions.
Member: Helps organizing different activities of the centre and performs responsibilities
as assigned.
Major functions of the PV centre
The goal of the PV centre is to have a long-term action plan for the video-mediated women
farmers’ empowerment process in the community. The PV centre serves as a ‘social laboratory’
of the project, as a way to plan and implement project activities that enable farmers’ innovation
capacity in the future. After discussion with the PV team, the project identified the following
specific functions of the centre:






Meeting weekly to discuss progress of activities and share experiences.
Assist in collection of innovation and farmers’ innovative ideas, stories, and experiences.
Development of proposals for farmers’ participatory research, implementation and
evaluation of participatory research.
Collaborate in planning, implementation and validation of learning video managed by the
project research team.
Use of video for fostering women empowerment in rural areas (Implementation of
farmers’ managed PV, document innovative ideas, or broadcast events through video that
may have an impact on women empowerment process at micro level).
Work as platform for facilitating communication between the community, the project
team, and any other potential actors that would stimulate agricultural innovation process.
The process of the capacity building is aligned with farmers’ participatory research (FPR)
principles. The PV team interacts with fellow farmers (PV community) to understand local
innovations and conduct relevant research. For this project we selected three major topics:
Organic manure preparation through waste management, Seed processing and post-harvest in
homestead and Ecological plant protection practices.
Firstly, we selected three crops: eggplant and leafy vegetables (red amaranth and Indian
spinach) for crop and seed production in the homestead, a food production unit within women’s
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
29
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
domain of work. PV members have learnt to produce organic eggplant by using their own vermicompost and botanical pesticide.
Secondly, it is necessary to understand key learning gaps and solutions in the area of organic
manure production. This project concentrates on vermi-compost. The project continues to
support this activity and started FPR on composting since its inception in 2010. It is a process of
using various species of worms, usually red wrigglers, white worms, and earthworms to create a
heterogeneous mixture of compost (Plate 1).
Plate 1. A PV community member working with her vermi-compost pit
According to project objectives PV members are providing consultation for promoting vermicomposting to the community members (Figure 4).
Figure 4. Number of farmers who visited PV centre for information on vermicomposting
Source: Annual progress report 2010
Thirdly, ongoing FPR on botanical pesticide was included as part of the project. The members of
PV centre in Kamarapara have been conducting FPR on botanical pesticide.
Farmers’ managed FPR, the researchers only intervened to facilitate and understand principles
of local innovations. The project target is to enhance women’s capacity for local innovations in
homestead-based crop and seed production- a pathway to address household food security. As
a part of FPR PV members are producing botanical pesticide from locally available plant
materials (Plate 2).
Plate 2. PV members are producing botanical pesticides
PV members usually use this botanical pesticide to protect their crops (especially vegetables)
from insect and disease pests. After producing additional amounts of botanical pesticide they
sell the excess to other community members. PV members of Kamarapara produced 180 liters
of botanical pesticide in 2010. After use in their own crop fields they have sold about 98 liters of
pesticide to other community members (Figure 5). As the learning gaps are identified and key
solutions are known, the next phase is to develop audio-visual learning material.
30
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
Figure 5. Amount of botanical pesticide distributed among community members
Source: Annual progress report 2010
We will follow a scripted style (as in case of ZIZO) to develop the video for enabling farmers’
learning beyond the pilot village i.e. where the PV-centre is located. We plan to organize 14
women‘s groups in 2-3 districts both in the north-east and north-west to produce these videos.
When scripted PV, will form the basis of farmer-to-farmer learning, while, a few scriptless videos
will be developed by the PV members to build awareness and advocacy for and within PV
community. It is important to develop a regional and local scaling out and scaling up strategy in
addition to project facilitated farmer-to-farmer learning in selected areas. One way it can be
done is by identifying potential actors and organizations that have an interest in incorporating
the learning materials in their programmes.
Plate 3. PV team members are learning about PV development
Resource person
conductive a classroom
session
PV team members are
learning from a
resource person about
h dl
PV team is discussing
major steps of scripted
and spontaneous PV
Female member of the
PV team is shooting a
sequence
In the final stage of the project we intend to accomplish the scaling out and scaling up tasks by
conducting research and verifying hypotheses developed on potentials of script less and scripted
videos.
Conclusions
The importance of agricultural extension to eliminate poverty, vulnerability and hunger cannot
be overemphasized. Along with other extension methods, participatory video can contribute
significantly in maintaining sustainability of agricultural systems as well as empowering PV
members. From our study we argue that PV has untapped potential to enhance farmers’
innovation and creativity. This can contribute to increase household food production and
utilization. We expect that this model will contribute towards achieving a food secure rural
Bangladesh. To ensure this happens we need to be inventive at both the personal and
organizational levels of partnerships.
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank CDR for providing financial support for the project. At the same time we
would like to express our heartiest thanks to PV members and others community members of
Kamarpara, Sajahanpur, Bogra for their immense help and cooperation in various operations.
References
Al-amin S, Miah MM, & Chowhdury AH 2004, Role of women in the improvement of livelihoods of resource
poor household. Bangladesh journal of extension education, 16(special issue), pp. 25-33.
BBS 2010, Statistical Year Book of Bangladesh, 2010. Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics, Planning Division,
Ministry of Planning, Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh.
Braun A, Jiggins J, Röling N, van den Berg H, & Snijders P 2006, A Global Survey and Review of Farmer
Field School Experiences. A Report for the International Livestock Research Institute.
Wageningen:
Endelea.
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
31
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
Chowdhury AH 2010, Having a System does not Make a Home of it… A Case Study on the Institutions
Building Process of an Agricultural Development Project in Bangladesh. Saarbrücken, Germany: Verlag
Dr. Müller.
DAE 1999, Agricultural Extension Manual. Farmgate, Dhaka: Department of Agricultural Extension, Ministry
of Agriculture, Government of the People's Republic of Bangladesh.
Huber B 1999, Communicative aspects of participatory video projects. Unpublished MSc Thesis. Swedish
University of Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala, Sweden.
Lunch N, & Lunch C 2006, Insights into participatory video: Ahandbook for the field. UK: Insight.
MOA 2005, 'Trends of Pesticides Consumption in Bangladesh'. A Booklet . Plant Protection Wing of the
Department of Agricultural Extension, Ministry of Agriculture, Government of the People's Republic of
Bangladesh.
Van den Ban AW, & Samanta RK (Eds.) 2006, Changing roles of agricultural extension in Asian nations. New
Delhi: B.R. Publishing Corporation.
Van Mele P 2006, Zooming-in zooming-out: a novel method to scale up local innovations and sustainable
technologies. International Journal of Agricultural Sustainability, 4(2), pp. 131-142.
Zossou E, Van Mele P, Vodouhe SD, & Wanvoeke J 2009, Comparing farmer-to-farmer video with workshops
to train rural women in improved rice parboiling in central Benin. Journal of Agricultural Education and
Extension, 15(4), pp. 329-339.
32
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
Organizational sustainability: The case of handcrafts micro
business in Southern San Sebastian
José G. Vargas-Hernández
University Center for Economic and Managerial Sciences, University of Guadalajara.
Email: [email protected]
Keywords: Organizational social capital, organizational sustainability, environmental culture,
economic development, Zapotlán’s Lagoon.
Introduction
The new conditions of globalization underlie life conditions and the importance of a generational
future as a component of competitiveness. What constitutes globalization is the interaction that
changes the scenarios for the individuals, organizations and society, who are constantly
hounded by contradictory forces and uncertainties. The ecological model of organizations widens
to include interactions which can integrate the environmental paradigm with the organizational
system. An organizations approach to sustainability is affected by the combination of ambiguous
environmental economic policies, the abrupt adoption of production technologies and market
practices. Sustainability in business organizations is an implementation strategy of process
reengineering and the adoption of production technologies oriented toward avoiding waste
materials, recycling trash and eliminating toxics. The lack of acceptance of the role that
business organizations play in sustainability influences the global debate that questions real
causes of pollution which poses safeguards to organizations and justifies poverty as the main
cause generating environmental degradation. It also suggests as a consequence of deterioration
the inadequate economic policies that allow for business actions less friendly with the
environment.
This paper aims, firstly to determine the level of organizational sustainability for the
environmental and economic development of cutting treatment and exploitation activities of the
grass called tule (Thypa spp) from the Zapotlán Lake. Secondly, the paper attempts to analyse
opportunities and economic benefits derived from a marketing orientation of international
business in the making of art craft out of tule and palmilla (a kind of palm) that grow
spontaneously in the Zapotlán Lake.
Organizational sustainability and organizational social capital
A sustainable organization integrates the ecological vision and the institutional theories in
organizational systemic values. The acquisition of a common sense in the production of goods
and services is utilized as a stronghold to promote the eco-efficiency as a friendly culture of
organizations with their environments to achieve emission reductions and rational exploitation
of natural resources. From the point of view of general theory of organizations, according to
Baker y Burt (cited by Portes 1999, p. 247) we study social capital to gain a greater insight,
comprehension and understanding of market competitiveness mechanisms, while Joyce (1998)
focuses his analysis of social capital in the leadership phenomena. Either the organization or
each one of its members can be incorporated as public and private issues to social capital. Thus,
from social capital emerge two patterns, the emphasis on public goods and the emphasis on
private goods. Leana y Van Buren III (1999) define organizational social capital as a resource
which reflects the character of social relations within the organization, achieved through the
levels of members’ orientation by collective objectives and shared trust. Social capital is a
collective attribute more than an aggregation of individual social connections. It is a byproduct
of other organizational activities and thus, it constitutes and is an indispensable component for
the collective action. Social organizational capital is an asset whose joint possession between
members and the organization benefits both.
A new organization has the advantage to create its own organizational social capital in such a
way that can maintain optimum equilibrium between stakeholders, individual and other
organizational interests in spite of their contingent nature; This is to say, different situations
and persons in their relation to organizational performance. A community relies on social
organizational capital when their organizations are characterized by relationships of trust that
develop and make predictable their behaviour. The capacity of a community is reflected in its
level of endogenous development. The organizations are concrete reality with resources, rules
and ordinances for the pursuit of objectives. Members of an organization have expectations to
solve problems of collective action to get supply of some goods and services.
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
33
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
The case of micro and small business enterprises involved in the exploitation of
tule (Typha spp) from the Lake of Zapotlan
Background of the problem
Similarly to the great majority of aquatic bodies localized in closed basins of Mexican national
territory, the Zapotlán Lake is the natural receptacle, dump and outlet where the sewage, trash
and black waters from the human settlements of Cd. Guzmán and san Sebastián del Sur
(Southern San Sebastián) converge. The presence of these natural elements form a nutrient
mix that facilitates the growth and development of an abundant aquatic mix which has spread
to cover almost the totality of the surface of the lake. The transformations of the environment
of Lake Zapotlán has a strong impact on the population’s socio-economic issues. Deterioration
of this lake body has achieved alarming levels as a consequence of the increasing population
and its corresponding enlarging urbanization processes, industrial, farming and agricultural
activities.
The natural resources offered by the lake, the aquatic tule, has been benefiting the settlers and
inhabitants of San Sebastián del Sur mainly for its exploitation through the crafting of several
products and handicrafts. Thus, the use of the tule and the expansion of handicrafts create
direct employment and constitute the income base for around 300 families and their members.
An approximate estimation is that one thousand five hundred individuals making a living out of
these activities in the municipality of Gomez Farías. Most benefit is obtained from the tule
chubby and plump followed by the one known as palmilla (palm).
To aggravate this problem, The Pan-American Olympic Games has chosen the Zapotlán’s Lake
as the location where the aquatic games will take place in 2011. Accordingly, the lake is having
a profound transformation which implies the clearance and cleaning of the lake´s edge from any
type of grass and bush, including the cutting off and taking out of the tule. Other factors
contributing to limit the environmental and economic sustainability of development and the
scope of benefits from economic activities and use of tule are the following:






No orientation toward a sustainable use of the tule as a natural resource.
Lack of organization between the cutters of tule and the handcrafters.
Weak infrastructure for the development of a more advanced handcrafted production.
Excessive interest of hoarders and middlemen in the processes of commercialization and
distribution of elaborated products.
Lack of mechanisms of governmental institutions to foster and develop economic
activities, such as credits, training and technical assistance.
No knowledge of techniques and systems to export their products to the international
markets where there is much interest in the products.
Until now, handcrafted products derived from the tule as the main raw material, are decorated
with a strong artistic content to go to local, regional, national and international markets, which
traditionally consume because there is a strong historic presence of Mexican culture since the
pre-colonial times. Handcrafts and goods handcrafted and made out of tule in the locality of San
Sebastian del Sur include chairs, curtains, armchairs, easy chairs, different types of containers
for different purposes, such as the tortillas containers, tables, blowers, bedrolls and matting
(petates), and baskets. Most of the craftsmen deliver their product to middlemen who always
perform as hoarders being a link in the distribution channel and contributing to the
commercialization of the handcrafted product. These middlemen hold the greater percentage of
profits.
The use of tule from the Zapotlán’s Lake has followed irrational patterns which affect not only
the environmental sustainability and equilibrium, but also generate problems of low family
income and lower employment. The rehabilitation of the Lake requires a more rational
exploitation of the tule, in such a way that does not affect the environmental sustainability and
the economic activity derived and the treatment of tule.
Objectives


34
To determine the level of organizational sustainability taking into account the economic
and environmental development out of tule cutting, treatment and exploitation activities
at the Zapotlan´s Lake.
To analyse opportunities and economic benefits derived from a marketing orientation of
international business in the making of handcrafted products made of tule and palmilla
from the Zapotlán´s Lake.
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
Research methods
A study was conducted of the handcrafters who carry on economic activities using tule as a raw
material in the making of handcrafts in the locality of San Sebastian del Sur, in the municipality
of Gomez Farías, Jalisco. The way in which data was obtained was through a random survey
based on the roster of handcrafters, which is a list of registered ones, with the purpose to know
different economic and social aspects of producers.
Trades of handcrafters and producers were classified in 4 groups, out of which it was found that
the 33 persons surveyed were dedicated to the following activities: Manufacturing of rustic
furniture 9, Hand-woven furniture and handcrafts 7. Manufacturing of matting and bedrolls 15.
Cutters of tule 2.
Analysis of results
The percentages of families who are dependent of related activities with tule according to the
survey results in the locality of San Sebastián del Sur are the following: rustic furniture 42%,
manufacturing of petates 39%, handcrafts 15% and cutters of tule 4%.
The weekly average salary per worker in the different activities related to the processing of tule
was estimated. This data showed: Manufacturers of rustic furniture $57 dollars, cutters of tule
$40, handcrafters $21, and handcrafting of petates $12. According to this study the percentage
of craftsmen affiliated to associations and organizations was only of 19%.
The majority, 94% of craftsmen in the location of San Sebastian receive some type of support
from any institution or dependence, while a small number of workers did not receive economic
support and promotion for their products and goods. Most (81%) of those surveyed have the
opinion that the market has benefited in the last years due to higher demand for their products.
Only 19% perceived that there have been difficulties selling their products. In regard to
pollution 45% said it was increasing, 42% equal to before and only 13% perceived pollution to
be reducing in the Zapotlan´s Lake.
Discussion and comments on organizational sustainability based on the research
results.
The presence of bundles of tule covering around one third of Zapotlán’s Lake surface
(Universidad de Guadalajara, 1995), is important for the nesting, refuge and protection of
several species of fish, including tilapia and carp, and also for several species of birds. The tule
plant serves as food for some species beginning from the organic material which becomes
detached from the roots, and it regulates water temperature, thus the environmental
temperature.
Cultivation and exploitation of tule constitutes an important economic activity, mainly for the
community of San Sebastian del Sur because it provides economic support to around three
hundred families. About 80 families are benefiting economically with the income received from
the cutting, drying and transport of tule. Around 140 families benefit from the handcrafted
production of goods made of both varieties of tule, the palmilla tule and the chubby tule. Out of
these 140 families, 120 are handcrafters of matting and bedrolls (petateros).
Around half of the 55 handcrafters registered in the Association trade have their own
workshops, while the other half only work in assembling plants. Around 70 families receive
income from intermediation, hoarding, stockpiling and commercialization activities of products
derived from tule.
Most of the manpower employed in the cutting of tule is permanent and their trade was
inherited from antecedent generations. According to the field research, due to the ongoing
changes taking place in the Zapotlán’s Lake, every year there are less cutters. The cutters of
tule dry their raw material and make up to two bunches per day that sells at an average price of
75-80 pesos each bundle. The income from the selling contributes to the daily family income
that averages 160 pesos per day. The tule palmilla used for the manufacturing of chairs is sold
to intermediaries; most of them are owners of small stores who stockpile it. The tule chubby is
sold to the craftsmen at a price a little bit less expensive to be used in the manufacturing of
matting and bedrolls (petates).
Many cutters supply raw material to their own families who are in charge of the crafting of
handcrafted products, widening with this situation the economic benefits and adding value. In
other cases, there are conducted some practices of half by half (“medieros”) between the
cutters and the handcrafters. This is to say, after the selling of products; both cutter and
handcrafter share the benefits in the same proportion, half and half.
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
35
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
According to our own research, those interviewed indicated that sales are declining. Today, they
argue, they sell less than 10 years ago and the middlemen and intermediaries obtain more
profits from the commercialization of the handcrafted products. For a handcrafted product to
reach the final consumer, at least three levels of distribution are required, and thus there are at
least two intermediaries between producers and consumers. The intermediaries are the ones
who attend national markets and to a lesser extent they export the handcrafted products to
some parts of United States, Canada, Puerto Rico, England and Japan.
Some of the problems that the craftsmen face relate to the lack of training programs to develop
and preserve handcrafter techniques, financial support, and obtaining credits to extend basic
production infrastructure, and of course, staffing and consultancy for direct exports of their
products to the international markets. Undertaking activities to address these issues will benefit
the economic income of more than 300 families in San Sebastián del Sur, Jalisco.
Conclusions
The exploitation of tule represents an economic activity that provides income to approximately
three hundred families living at the settlement of San Sebastian del Sur. Nevertheless, in the
last few years the income has been decreasing due to the environmental changes and to the
rehabilitation of the Zapotlan’s Lake to host the Pan-American Games in 2011. Both, the
environmental changes and rehabilitation of the lake represent a serious threat to the economic
efficiency and environmental sustainability.
Achieving equilibrium between environmental sustainability and economic sustainability must be
one of the main goals of the rehabilitation programs. Thus a systematic study to determine
indicators of the most adequate levels of environmental sustainability and economic efficiency is
required. The limited social organizational capital hinders the scope of economic benefits that
can be achieved from the exploitation of tule from the Zapotlan’s Lake.
Disorganization of cutters and craftsmen of tule is the source of profound and increasing
conflict. This not only blocks and limits the scope of better levels of productivity and family
income, but also makes coexistence and living together difficult and spoils the community´s
quality of life.
The lack of a consultancy program to export handcrafted products lowers incomes to the
families of cutters and craftsmen, because the intermediaries who take part on the
commercialization processes and distribution channels obtain the greater part of profits.
Some characteristics of specificity and appropriateness of social and human capital involve
economic, social and political relationships among individuals who are members of organizations
with complex interactions. The market is a social construction that relies on operational social
relations. Both social and human capital can be important resources of the competitive
advantage, assuming that these reside in the members, or are specific to the organizations as
integral parts of resources that are unique. Organizations with higher levels of social and human
capital generate more competitiveness than those with lower levels. Therefore a sustainable and
competitive Economy requires programs aimed to improve social and human capital.
Recommendations
Some recommendations after this research are formulated below:



Design a program to promote handcrafted activities derived from the exploitation of tule
in parallel to the rehabilitation program of Zapotlán’s Lake that establishes the right
indicators to achieve equilibrium between economic efficiency and environmental
sustainability.
To set a program of export consultancy with the support and technical staffing from
students of international business at University of Guadalajara that provides the
knowledge, skills and contacts in such a way that the tule´s craftsmen directly
commercialize and market their own handcrafted products in the international markets.
To propose a program for development of organizational and social capital and new forms
of organization aimed to increase productivity and competitiveness of the craftsmen, thus
increasing their family income and promoting employment creation and improve the
quality of life of the whole community of San Sebastian del Sur.
References
Joyce, Paul (1998), “Management and innovation in the public services”. Strategy Change, 7.
Leana, R. Carrie; Van Buren III, Harry (1999), “Organizational social capital and employment practices”,
Academy of Management Review, Vol. 24, No. 3. Ohio.
36
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
Portes, Alejandro (1999), “Capital social: Sus orígenes y aplicaciones en la sociología moderna”, Carpio,
Jorge y Novaconvsky, Irene (comp.), De igual a igual. El desafío del Estado ante los nuevos problemas
sociales, Fondo de Cultura económica-Siempro-Flacso, Ciudad de México.
Universidad de Guadalajara (1995), Ordenamiento Ecológico de la Cuenca de la Laguna de Zapotlán el
Grande Jalisco, Gobierno municipal, Cd. Guzmán, Jalisco.
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
37
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
Building a coordinated approach to Climate Change extension
Greg Reid1
NSW Dept of Primary Industries, 135 Main St, Murwillumbah, NSW 2484
Email: [email protected]
Abstract. A broad range of agencies and organisations have accepted climate change
projections into their planning, however this has not yet translated into a broad cooperative
response of cross promotion and shared expertise. This paper reports on an example where
inviting other agencies to information sessions led to extension events and then to training
reaching hundreds of landowners across several regions. Some organisations contributed
resources while others contributed expertise. Synergies not only accrued to the cooperating
agencies but also to the participants since they were less likely to attend events which were
too specialised or too similar. Contact lists were indirectly linked to reach new groups. Initial
surveys of landowners found that 20% had become less convinced of climate change in
2009/2010 and that only 50% remained convinced of anthropogenic global warming. Exit
surveys from the events found that 97% had learnt more about climate change and carbon.
Sampling surveys subsequent to specific training found that 85% planned to implement
adaptation changes on their property. Resources were developed that are now being adapted
for internet delivery to reach an even wider audience. No single organisation has the
resources or expertise to mount and maintain a decade spanning effort to counter
misinformation and complacency on all the implications of climate change. The example
outlined here demonstrates that cooperation between agencies is not only possible but offers
benefits, opportunities and gravitas to all parties.
Keywords: carbon, adaptation, survey, internet.
Introduction
Agricultural extension is often driven by grant funding to address particular issues in particular
industries in particular regions. In contrast, climate change is an issue with multiple effects on
all industries in all regions. The effects are so broad as to involve a range of agencies including
the Rural Fire Service, Catchment Management Authorities, Livestock Health and Pest
Authorities, Irrigation Authorities, local councils and government agencies such as NSW DPI. In
the past, regional agencies have cooperated on related issues but not coordinated, generally
proceeding independently along lines of differing expertise and responsibilities.
Climate change presents an extension task on an entirely new scale. Not only is the challenge
beyond the resources of individual agencies but were those agencies to proceed independently
they would find themselves in competition for the time and attention of landowners. A further
complication is that despite the rapidly evolving nature of climate change information the
audience is becoming fatigued and in some cases, hostile.
Methodology
During 2010 workshops entitled “Farming in a Changing Climate” (Reid 2009) were offered to
landholders in four regions of NSW. Local staff of the Department of Primary Industries were
invited to attend but appeared defensive when placed among the “clients”. As an alternative,
shorter, one day workshops were offered to staff and invitations were extended to the local
offices of other agencies.
In direct consequence to the “Farming in a Changing Climate” workshops, members of the
Livestock Health and Pest Authority (LHPA) requested and offered to fund evening seminars for
landholders. In turn staff in the Health Department requested daytime seminars as a draw to
talk to landholders about health issues. Staff with the catchment management authority
supported funding for the development of a training course “Managing Land for Carbon”.
The contact lists of the LHPA drew upon a wide customer base and ensured the evening
seminars were fully booked. More seminars were organised and then carried to adjacent
regions. Having officers of the LHPA and the Department of Primary Industries at the podium
lent additional authority and helped to deal with occasional hostile responses. The seminars also
led directly and indirectly to enrolments in workshop training.
The workshops touched upon increasing fire risks, however presenters from the Department of
Primary Industries lacked specific expertise in this area. Education Officers from the Rural Fire
Service were invited to address landowners at the workshops and in every case made a strong
impression on the participants. The Rural Fire Service officers were pleased to attend since they
found it difficult to attract landholders to meetings focused solely on bushfires.
38
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
At each event, participants were asked to complete a brief entry survey to capture their initial
opinions and later asked to complete an exit survey to gauge their intentions. A sampling
survey was conducted of participants who had received training earlier in the program.
Results
Four, one day workshops open to staff from multiple agencies led to:






eight evening seminars
four daytime seminars
nine intensive workshops
344 landowners across three regions received two hours of information or up to 21 hours
of intensive training.
Funding was leveraged from a variety of sources totalling $84,800 in cash grants.
The training courses “Farming in a Changing Climate” and “Managing Land for Carbon”
have been adapted for e-learning and are now offered on-line.
Entry Surveys
Entry surveys of the participating landowners indicated that 20% had become less convinced of
climate change over the previous 12 months (Table 1). Only 50% remained convinced of
anthropogenic climate change, a figure consistent with wider surveys as established in the
Water in Drylands Collaborative Research Program (2010). Over 80% of respondents indicated
they did not understand carbon trading and had a range of concerns. Few knew the conditions
under which forest carbon might be claimed or how soil carbon might be acceptably measured.
Table 1. Entry survey responses (%)
Survey Response
Percentage
Have become less convinced of climate change over the past 12 months
20%
Convinced of man made climate change
50%
Do not understand carbon trading
84%
Do not know the conditions required for farm forest carbon credits
82%
Do not know the testing requirements for soil carbon
92%
Have concerns about carbon trading eg price, costs, penalties, title restrictions
80%
n = 171
Exit Surveys
Following the information seminars or training the landholders reported they had learnt more
about climate change (97%), soil carbon (99%) and carbon trading (96%). While the
landholders still had concerns about carbon trading 88% remained interested in carbon
contracts for soil or forest carbon.
Sampling Survey
A sample survey of 40 landowners who had received workshop training earlier in the program
contrasted strongly with the entry surveys of others. Of the trained landowners only 8% had
become less convinced of climate change and 78% remained convinced. Over 85% had
instituted climate change adaptations as a result of the training, investing an average of
$29,226 per property.
Discussion
Many landowners have become less convinced of climate change and some have become hostile
to the subject. The “Entry Survey” results indicated that the landowners lacked specific
information on a range of related subjects. “Exit Surveys” showed that the seminars or training
workshops were effective in meeting some of these knowledge gaps and the “Sampling Survey”
indicated that this knowledge can stabilise views and lead to practice change.
A key challenge in extension via seminars or workshops is to attract participants in numbers and
to reach a broad cross section of landholders. Some studies have found that less than 20% of
landowners are even inclined to attend workshops or field days (Curtis and Mendham 2011).
Only 18% of the participants in the workshops reported here had learnt of the program through
commercial advertising. Contact lists held by extension officers are often relied upon heavily but
these can become dated or restricted to “the usual suspects”.
The experience reported in this paper highlights the value of coordinating with other agencies.
Access was gained to wider contact lists and promotion through newsletters. The “combined
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
39
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
front” presented by cooperating agencies impressed landowners as to the value of attending
and was particularly valuable in managing hostile fractions of the audience. All events were fully
booked and sometimes over booked despite a rapid expansion of the schedule to meet demand.
Combining expertise and resources benefited each agency and the program outcomes.
Landowners have limited time to attend multiple seminars or workshops organised by separate
agencies and are unlikely to attend events covering similar material. Interest in events focused
on climate change appeared to decline sharply through 2010. Events which focused on new
issues such as carbon trading received much more interest and were effective as a vehicle to
deliver a spread of related messages from multiple agencies.
References
Curtis A and Mendham E 2011, ‘Bridging the gap between policy and management of natural resources’, in
D Pannell and F. Vanclay (eds). Changing Land Management, CSIRO Publishing, Melbourne, pp. 153176.
Reid GH 2009, ‘Building resilience to climate change in rain-fed agricultural enterprises: An integrated
property planning tool’, Agriculture and Human Values 26: 391-397.
Water in Drylands Collaborative Research Program 2010. ‘Understanding farmer knowledge and attitudes to
climate change, climate variability, and greenhouse gas emissions’, Victorian DPI. Melbourne.
40
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
You are invited to the marriage of Extension and Vocational
Training
Charlie Bell and Darren Bayley
Tocal College NSW DPI, Tocal Road, Paterson, NSW 2421.
Email [email protected]
Extension or Education?
For the past 200 or so years, the development of modern farming systems has been driven by a
continuous stream of new technology, underpinning knowledge and skills. In the early phases of
the 'industrialisation of agriculture' the dissemination of information and new practices was
mainly facilitated by informal processes (looking over the fence) and by market forces.
As the rate of change accelerated in the late nineteenth century across the developed world, all
nations have made decisions and implemented a range of systems to encourage, guide and
control the adoption of more advanced farming systems. Some countries have been driven by
the need for food security for a hungry population; others have developed agriculture to service
export markets and secure an income source for the country (Umali and Schwartz 1994) Either
way, there is an overarching public policy objective.
Australia adopted the idea that extension through public sector advisory services was the best
way to bring about practice change in farming. Driven by the politics of the Country Party and
'agrarian socialism', the rural industries were a special breed which received services not
generally available to other industry sectors. Formal training and credentials were never a major
priority.
The various state departments of agriculture were, for much of the twentieth century, relatively
well funded to carry out basic and applied research and provide extension services to industry
as a means of achieving government strategic objectives. Universities and Agricultural colleges
produced tertiary trained 'experts' providing one-on-one advice and assistance to farmers.
Services ranging from soil testing to publications were provided to agriculture by the public
sector at no cost. At the same time relatively small numbers of farm workers and managers
were attaining qualifications at Certificate, Diploma and Degree level through Colleges and
Universities.
This system proved very successful for many years and effectively drove practice change and
increases in productivity across all rural industry sectors. However, as a direct result of this
policy Australia never developed a culture of qualifications in the rural sector and these are not
a barrier to entry nor are they rewarded by industry at the operational level. As a result
Australia has one of the lowest levels in the developed world of farmers and farm workers
holding post secondary qualifications (NCVER 2011). This does not necessarily mean that
Australia's farm workforce is less skilled than other nations (our efficiency and production
records would indicate otherwise), but is does confirm that the skills and knowledge have been
acquired through 'non-formal' learning mechanisms and these are not recognised as a
qualification.
By contrast, much of Europe adopted the opposite approach to achieve the objectives of
increasing farm production, food security and sustainable landscape management. All of the
nations of Western Europe have extensive networks of agricultural colleges and a strong culture
of credentials as essential for working in agriculture. Lack of qualifications are a barrier to entry
into farming in Western Europe where formal qualifications are required in order to be granted
access to a range of government assistance programs. A good example of lack of credentials as
a barrier to entry in Europe is the process of obtaining an ‘Authorisation to Farm’ in France.
(Gibbard 1997) France provides concessional interest loans and grants to qualified young
farmers. Applicants are required to hold appropriate qualifications in order to qualify for an
Authorisation to Farm (Point Info International 2011) and subsequently gain access to
substantial benefits.
In the United Kingdom an extensive network of county-based and funded Agricultural Colleges
was developed after 1945 as a response to the need to increase food production in the UK. New
industry entrants were strongly encouraged and subsidised to undertake training through the
college system. This system embedded qualifications into the culture of British farming and
resulted in the UK having approximately 80 percent of farmers and farm workers holding some
post secondary qualification. Qualifications are embedded into the industrial award system in
the UK with the Agricultural Wages Board mandating qualifications for access to higher Grades
in the award (Agricultural Wages Board 2010).
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
41
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
The establishment of a population of formally trained and credentialed farmers and farm
workers in Europe has helped to drive productivity gains in agriculture. The UK has moved from
the position of net food importer in 1945 to a net exporter of food today – despite significant
population increase (DEFRA 2010, DEFRA 2009). The UK and Europe have been successful in
achieving adoption of new technology and new farming systems through formal education along
with extension programs in the same way as Australia has achieved these same outcomes with
a heavy reliance in non-formal education through extension processes. Therefore, there is a
case for the effectiveness of both systems with the two approaches achieving similar outcomes
and, indeed, that extension is essentially adult education. (Rivera 1998)
What has changed in extension?
Extension has traditionally been based on the technology transfer approach that focuses on
promoting advances in technology to the rural community, as shown in the linear model below:
Researchknowledgetransferadoptiondiffusion
This extension approach continues to dominate extension practice even though it has been
widely criticised for many decades. Criticism has centred around its numerous false assumptions
and limited applicability (Roling 1988; Russell et al. 1989;Vanclay 1992; Vanclay and Lawrence
1995; Ison & Russell 2000). The technocratic nature of traditional research and extension has
been criticised for often reducing and masking the complexities of rural situations (Cornwall et
al. 1994), and for its uncritical acceptance of technological innovation as a liberating agent
(Buttel et al. 1990; Furze 1992; Vanclay 1992; Vanclay and Lawrence 1995). This is especially
the case when dealing with complex, contested, and ‘wicked’ issues associated with natural
resource management (NRM) and sustainability (Cornwall et al. 1994; Bellamy 2007). Natural
resource management issues demand a cooperative and coordinated response from government
because many of the influences which affect the problem fall outside the jurisdiction of any one
agency to manage (Bates 2003; Crabb 2003; Bellamy 2007). These ‘wicked’ NRM issues are
persistent, non-linear, involve long time scales, and are socially constructed, with no optimal
solutions or definitive and objective answers (Bellamy 2007).
The NSW Department of Primary Industries (DPI) and its’ former department, NSW Agriculture
has a proud history of providing a state-wide training and extension service for farmers, land
managers and agribusiness. This was built on a district service model where staff skilled in
particular agricultural disciplines would extend new technologies and practices to farmers to
increase their production and productivity. The model was based on the assumption that
farmers and other clients were largely passive recipients of knowledge and skills formulated in
the scientific domain; that the agency was the main and dominate provider of this new
knowledge and technology and that government would continue to provide the funding to
support this model. While this model of training and extension has been modified over time to
address some emerging issues and priorities within government and industry, it continues to
dominate the approach and view NSW DPI takes in service delivery. Unfortunately, the
operating environment has fundamentally changed, requiring a new and creative approach to
extension and training delivery for NSW Department of Primary Industries.
Over the past 20 years there has been a major policy shift in the way state and federal
governments in Australia funded and managed research and extension services. A major
principle driving this change is the general trend of governments to withdraw from provision of
services which can be delivered by the private sector. This policy shift has particularly applied a
great deal of scrutiny to agricultural advisory and extension services offered by state agriculture
departments.
In response to these recent policy shifts DPI has been proactive in the merging of extension and
vocational education services through the establishment of the PROfarm program in 2006 which
aligns formal extension activities with vocational training outcomes that are clearly articulated,
costed, promoted and reported on for all stakeholders. Fundamental to making this work is the
close relationship between DPI’s Registered Training Organisation, Tocal College and the
extension and industry development units across the state. This has also opened up greater
funding and industry partnership opportunities for the DPI extension program.
NSW DPI will need to continue to adapt to a model that has a stronger focus on alliances,
partnerships, multi-disciplinary teams, and participative approaches that incorporate problem
solving, adaptive management and experiential learning. This new approach will also be
informed by adult learning principles (Bayley and Brouwer 2004). The value of aligning
extension and education has been identified since the 1990’s where Kilpatrick (1996) identified
that farmers who undertake one or more education and training activities are three times as
likely to be using a farm plan to make management decisions compared to farmers who
42
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
undertake no training. The same study found that farmers who had taken further education and
training (post-school) were more likely to make changes to land management practices to
improve profitability and were generally more profitable.
What has changed in the Vocational Education and Training sector?
Through the 1990s the vocational education training sector (VET) in Australia was also given a
major overhaul. Starting in the late 1980s a series of wide ranging reforms under the banner of
the National Training Reform Agenda were implemented to improve the competitiveness of
Australian industry (Guthrie 2009).
Historically, vocational training in Australia focussed on trade training using a “time served”
model of education. (ANTA 1994) This system of training lacked flexibility and was losing
relevance to the rapidly changing Australian economy after the structural reforms of the
Hawk/Keating government during the 1980s which opened up Australia to international markets
and reduced protectionist policies (Dawkins 1988).
The foundations of this process were the introduction of (Guthrie 2009):







Key Competencies and employability skills
Competency Based Training
Nationally recognised qualifications defined by Training Packages
Accredited courses delivered by Registered Training Organisations
The Australian Qualifications Framework
The Australian Quality Training Framework
New funding arrangements between the States and Commonwealth
A major driver of the changes of the 1990s was the funding process. The Keating government in
1992 proposed a Commonwealth takeover of state responsibilities for vocational education. This
proposal was rejected by the states but a compromise was implemented in the establishment of
the Australian National Training Authority (ANTA) and increased Commonwealth funding for
training. Funding was then directed through the establishment of a training market for both
public and private providers which introduced competition and promoted capacity building
(Ferrier et al. 2008)
Industry Skills Councils (ISCs) were established to enable stakeholders to have a much greater
input into the training system. Systems have also been implemented to identify skills shortages
and ensure that these are addressed in funding priorities. (e.g. State Training Services 20112012 NSW Skills Priority List)
One of the main outcomes of all these reforms is to establish a much stronger linkage between
investment in training and economic performance. This is achieved through training focussing
on “what individuals can do as a result of their training, rather than how long they have spent
doing it” (ANTA 1994) through Competency Based Training), funding linked to outcomes and
accreditation of Registered Training Organisations (RTOs).
Through this reform process Australia now has a VET system which is much broader, has much
stronger linkages with industry and a focus on outcomes. This has given governments the tools
needed to direct funds strategically to support training where skills shortages are identified (e.g.
2011-2012 NSW Skills Priority List State Training Services 2011) and measure the outcomes of
this training. Training subsidies are paid to individuals and RTOs on the basis of course
completions and recording of assessment results.
A wide range of funding sources have been put in place by both State and Commonwealth
governments to support this process. Funding for VET training programs is relatively stable and
adequate for RTOs to develop and deliver training programs to industry. Recurrent funding is
easily accessible for Traineeships and Apprenticeships through state based systems and funding
is made available by both state and Commonwealth governments to address strategic skills
shortages. Some recent examples are: FarmBis program (Replaced by FarmReady); FarmReady
Program (FarmReady 2011); Productivity Places Program (DEEWR 2010); and The
Commonwealth Workforce Development Fund (DEEWR 2011). All of these programs have inprinciple bipartisan political support and significant budget allocations from both Labor and
Coalition governments. The medium to long term funding outlook for vocational educational
programs from both State and Federal sources appears quite secure.
So we have a stark contrast between the funding outlook for the VET sector and public sector
advisory and extension services. VET funding appears to be reasonably secure and has
bipartisan support at both State and Federal level. VET is seen as a “public good” activity and is
therefore supported. By contrast public funding for advisory and extension activities is always
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
43
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
subject to the 'market failure' test – can this service be provided to industry by the private
sector on a commercial basis? If the answer is 'yes' governments will always question the
allocation of resources to this activity.
An arranged marriage where true love has grown?
A marriage of extension and VET makes sense from the perspective of access to sustainable
funding sources but does it really work as a sustainable relationship? Fortunately, this is one of
those fairytale marriages where true love and commitment can emerge and prosper. Tocal
College and NSW DPI (and its predecessors) have been at the forefront of developing programs
to combine extension and education. There have been a few disputes and ‘rough patches’, but
the relationship is still intact and growing.
NSW DPI PROfarm Program
The NSW DPI PROfarm program is the most comprehensive and ambitious example of the
merging of traditional extension activities. The program was established in 1996 and has
developed over subsequent years to have on offer over 80 training courses (DPI 2011). Many of
the PROfarm courses are aligned to National Units of Competency and can contribute towards
Qualifications at Certificate II, III, IV, Diploma and Advanced Diploma levels. A number of these
courses are eligible for current FarmReady subsidy payments (FarmReady 2011).
PROfarm courses are delivered throughout NSW by suitably qualified NSW DPI advisory staff or
contractors. Many advisory staff have been involved in the development, marketing and delivery
of the courses and have been crucial in gaining industry support and building credibility for the
program. Tocal College administers all aspect of the course, records results and issues
Statements of Attendance or Statements of Attainment (where assessment is carried out).
All participants in PROfarm courses are recorded via formal enrolment – if assessment is
required - or registration and are asked to complete a feedback sheet at the end of the course.
This information is used by DPI advisory staff to monitor the effectiveness of the programs and
to compile reporting data to quantify the training being delivered to industry.
The PROfarm program has provided the vehicle for the repackaging of many pre-existing
extension and advisory activities as short courses with definable educational outcomes and
access to formal assessment and accreditation processes. In many cases, existing resources
have been adapted and reused quite effectively within the short course training context.
There have been more than 30,000 participants in the PROfarm short-course program since its
inception in 2006. The PROfarm program improves coordination, program design, and
implementation, while assisting growing demands for transparency and accountability (Briggs
2008a and 2008b).
The cotton industry
The Australian cotton industry was an early adopter of accredited training via short-course
delivery as a mechanism for achieving extension objectives. The development of the Integrated
Pest Management grower short course and commencement of delivery in 2001 was one of the
first examples of this (CRDC 2005). This Cotton Research and Development Corporation funded
project delivered training to over 220 cotton industry staff and 169 course participants were
awarded a Statement of Attainment by either Murrumbidgee College of Agriculture (NSW) or
Dalby Agricultural College (Qld). This course was aligned to a Diploma unit - RTE5006A Plan and
manage long-term weed, pest and/or disease control in crops.
The cotton industry has made great progress over the past 15 years in improving the standards
of environmental management and subsequently the industry image. A cornerstone of this
process was the establishment in the ‘Australian Cotton Industry Best Practice Management
Program’ - or Cotton BMP - in 1996. Farms which implemented a set of management practices
to improve environmental outcomes were able to apply for accreditation under the BMP
program. An identified deficiency of this program was the lack of recognition of the role of the
farm manager in complying with BMP. To address this situation a FarmBis Queensland funded
project was established to investigate the alignment of the BMP processes to Units of
Competency from the Rural Production Training Package. 19 Units of competence were
identified through this process (CRDC 2007). Ten of these Units of Competency were selected as
the basis for Diploma of Agriculture and an Accreditation program.
The assessment process for certification is based on Recognition of Prior Learning (RPL) and is
carried out by a farm-based interview where the assessors collect evidence of professional
practice and training which aligns to the above Units of Competence. (Tocal 2011). Evidence of
competence can include a wide range of documentation relating to the management of the farm
44
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
and the implementation of Cotton BMP. Examples of the contribution of training to this process
are Integrated Pest Management grower short course (see above), WaterPac - A Guide for
Irrigation Management in Cotton (CRDC 2008).
The Certified Cotton BMP Manager program is an innovative approach to the development of a
professional accreditation program for industry which allows professionals to gain recognition for
latent skills and knowledge and remove the need for training where not required and identify
further training where needed. This Certification will, with further development, become the
standard for quality management in the cotton industry.
Emergency Animal Disease Training Program
The Emergency Animal Disease (EAD) Training Program is an initiative of Animal Health
Australia (AHA) which ‘is a not-for-profit public company established by the Australian
Government, state and territory governments and major national livestock industry
organisations …….. to manage programs that improve animal and human health, biosecurity,
market access, livestock welfare, productivity, and food safety and quality’ (AHA 2011). The
EAD Training Program was established in 1996 to develop a workforce with the skills and
knowledge to be quickly mobilised in the event of a biosecurity emergency. This includes agency
staff from all jurisdictions, veterinarians – both public and private – and representatives from all
livestock industry stakeholder groups.
In 2004, all EAD Training programs were revised and aligned to ‘Skill Sets’ (State Training
Services 2011) for all of the different roles within an EAD as defined by AUSVETPLAN (AHA
2011). These Skill Sets comprise Units of Competency from the Rural Production Training
Package and the Public Safety Training Package. Tocal College was contracted to provide the
credentials for this program and oversee the compliance of the training to the Australian Quality
Training Framework or AQTF (see State Training Services 2011).
Since 2004 over two thousand people have been trained and certified by this program resulting
in a great improvement in Australia’s capability to respond to a biosecurity emergency.
Accredited training has provided the framework and standards for delivery of training and
objective assessment of candidates against the Skills, Knowledge and Performance Criteria
defined by the Training Package. Recording and reporting of results of assessment also provides
the basis for funding of the training program, monitoring and reporting progress. Without the
objectivity and rigour provided by the nationally recognised competencies, qualifications and the
AQTF, this national training program would not be possible.
Conclusion
All good relationships change and progress over time as those involved mature and their needs
and environment changes. The days of independence and autonomy with sustainable income
from public funding sources are now past and the focus should now be on building and
sustaining the relationship and providing for the ‘family’ of clients in the rural industries. In this
paper we have given a brief outline of the Extension and Vocational Education landscape and
the changes that have led us to where we are today. Australian society has changed
dramatically since the days when we ‘rode on the sheep’s back’ and all Australians felt some
connection to the land. We are now a highly urbanised society and the political influence of the
rural sector is much reduced. As a consequence public funding for agricultural research and
extension is unlikely to recover to previous levels. However, this does not mean that we cannot
achieve the same objectives of practice change and productivity improvement in agricultural
production and environmental management. We need to reconceive the process and match our
activities more closely to the direction that society and governments are heading. This means
working in the marriage of extension and VET and riding through a few rough patches. It is an
ancient institution never more relevant than in these times of rapid change.
The examples of the integration of traditional extension activities with VET discussed above
demonstrate how this can be done with a ‘marriage’ of two existing systems and some creative
thinking. So let’s drink a toast to the happy couple and wish them a long, happy and fruitful life
together.
References:
Agricultural Wages Board. 2011 ‘Agricultural Wages Board (AWB) new Grading System’ Department of
Agriculture
and
Rural
Development,
United
Kingdom,
http://www.dardni.gov.uk/awb_grade_definitions.doc Accessed August 2011
AHA
2011,
‘Emergency
Animal
Disease
Training
Program’
Animal
Health
Australia
http://www.animalhealthaustralia.com.au/training-centre/emergency-animal-disease-training-program/
Accessed August 2011
ANTA 1994, ‘Towards a Skilled Australia’. Australian National Training Authority
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
45
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
ANTA 2004, ‘Australia’s National Strategy for vocational education and training 2004-2010’ Australian
National Training Authority
Bates, G 2003, ‘Legal Perspectives’ in S Dovers and S Wild River (eds.) Managing Australia’s Environment,
Federation Press, Sydney.
Bayley D and Brouwer 2004, ‘Using climate information to improve agricultural systems’ in H Marvi and G
Tupper Agrometeorology, principles and applications of climate studies in agriculture. Haworth Press,
New York.
Bellamy, J 2007, ‘Adaptive Governance: The Challenge for Regional Natural Resource Management’ in A
Brown and J Bellamy (eds.) Federalism and Regionalism in Australia: New Approaches, New institutions?
ANU Press, Sydney.
COAG 2011,‘Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) on Federal Financial Relations. Schedule F National
Agreement for Skills and Workforce Development’. Council of Australian Governments.
http://www.coag.gov.au/intergov_agreements/federal_financial_relations/ Accessed August 2011
Briggs, L (Australian Public Service Commissioner) 2008a, Climate of Disclosure: The Public Service and the
Right to Know, Presentation Walkley Foundation of Public Affairs Convention, 19 August 2008, Australian
Public
Service
Commission,
Canberra,
viewed
28
April
2009,
<http://www.apsc.gov.au/media/briggs190808.htm>.
Briggs, L (Australian Public Service Commissioner) 2008b, Public sector ethics in the 21st Century: The new
vulnerabilities, 2008 David Hawkes Oration, 10 November 2008, Australian Public Service Commission,
Canberra, viewed 28 April 2009, <http://www.apsc.gov.au/media/briggs101108.htm>.
Buttel, F Larson, O and Gillespie, G 1990, The sociology of agriculture, Greenwood New York.
Cornwall, A Guijt, I and Welbourn, A 1994, ‘Acknowledging process: challenges for agricultural research and
extension methodology’ in I Scoones and J Thompson (eds.) Beyond farmer first, rural people's
knowledge, agricultural research and extension practice, Intermediate technology publications, U.K.
Crabb, P 2003 ‘Straddling Boundaries: Intergovernmental Arrangements for Managing Natural Resources’ in
S Dovers and S Wild River (eds.) Managing Australia’s Environment, Federation Press, Sydney.
CRDC 2005, ‘Final Report - IPM Training Coordinator’ Cotton Research and Development Corporation
http://www.crdc.com.au/uploaded/file/Final%20Reports%200308/CC%20CRC35C%20e%20Final%20Report.pdf Accessed August 2011
CRDC 2007, ‘Final report - Aligning National Competencies with the Cotton Industry’s Best Management
Guidelines
for
Strategic
Training’,
Cotton
Research
and
Development
Corporation
http://www.crdc.com.au/uploaded/file/Final%20Reports%200308/CC%20FARMBIS%20e%20Final%20Report%2008.pdf Accessed August 2011
CRDC 2008, ‘WATERpac A Guide for Irrigation Management in Cotton’, Cotton Research and Development
Corporation.
http://www.cottoncrc.org.au/content/Industry/Publications/Water/WATERpak.aspx
Accessed August 2011
CRDC 2008 ‘Many degrees of BMP’ Spotlight Spring 2008. Cotton Research and Development Corporation. p
19
Dawkins, J 1988, ‘Industry training in Australia: The need for change’, Australian Government Publishing
Service, Canberra.
DEEWR 2010 ‘Productivity Places Program’, Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations
http://www.deewr.gov.au/Skills/Programs/SkillTraining/ProductivityPlaces/Pages/Overview.aspx
Accessed
August 2011
DEFRA 2009, ‘UK Food Security Assessment: Detailed Analysis’, Department for Environment, Food and
Rural Affairs, http://archive.defra.gov.uk/foodfarm/food/pdf/food-assess100105.pdf Accessed August
2011
DEFRA 2010, ‘Food Statistics Pocketbook 2010’, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs,
http://archive.defra.gov.uk/evidence/statistics/foodfarm/food/pocketstats/documents/foodpocketbook2010.
pdf Accessed August 2011
DPI 2005, ‘ANNUAL REPORT 2004–05’ NSW Department of Primary Industries
http://intranet.dpi.nsw.gov.au/department/publications/annual-report/annual-report-2004-05.pdf
DPI
2011,
‘PROfarm
Course
list’,
NSW
Department
of
Primary
Industries
http://www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/agriculture/profarm/courses
Farm Ready 2011, ‘FarmReady Reimbursement Grants Program Guidelines’, Australian Government
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry
http://www.farmready.gov.au/Guidelines/FarmReady%20Reimbursement%20Grant%20Guidelines%202011
.pdf Accessed August 2011
Ferrier et al 2008, ‘Vocational education and training providers in competitive training markets’, National
Centre for Vocational Education Research (NCVER)
Fragar et al 2011, ‘Adoption of Health and Safety Change on Australian Farming and Fishing Enterprises’,
Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation. www.rirdc.gov.au.
Furze, B 1992, ‘Environmental management and capitalist agriculture’ in Agriculture environment and
society, (eds) G. Lawrence, F. Vanclay and B. Furze. Macmillan Publishing Australia.
Gibbard, Roger 1997, ‘The relationship between European Community agricultural Structural Policies and
their implementation and agricultural succession and inheritance within Member States’, The University
of Reading p. 16
Goozee, Gillian 2001, ‘The development of TAFE in Australia’, National Centre for Vocational Education
Research
Guthrie, Hugh 2009, ‘Competence and competency-based training: What the literature says’.
National Centre for Vocational Education Research
46
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
Ison, R and Russell D 2000, Agricultural extension and rural development; breaking out of traditions.
Cambridge University Press, United Kingdom.
Kilpatrick, S 1996 ‘Change, training and farm profitability’ National Farmer’s Federation Research Paper 10.
Canberra, Australia: National Farmer’s Federation.
NCVER 2011, Historical time series of vocational education and training in Australia, from 1981, National
Centre for Vocational Education Research. http://www.ncver.edu.au/publications/2395.html Accessed
August 2011
Rivera, William M 1998, ‘Agricultural extension as adult education: institutional evolution and forces for
change’, International journal of lifelong education; 17; 4; July-August 1998; pp.260-264
Roling, N 1988, Extension Science - information systems in agricultural development, Cambridge University
Press, U.K.
Russell, D Ison, R Gamble, D and Williams, R 1989, A critical review of rural extension theory and practice,
Australian Wool Corporation - University of Western Sydney, Hawkesbury NSW.
State Training Services 2011, ‘2011-2012 NSW Skills Priority List’, Department of Education and
Communities.
https://www.training.nsw.gov.au/forms_documents/industry_programs/business_services/2011_2012_skills
_priorities_list.pdf Accessed August 2011
State Training Services 2011, ‘A complete guide to apprenticeships and traineeships in New South Wales’,
Department of Education and Communities.
https://www.training.nsw.gov.au/forms_documents/apprenticeships_traineeships/fullguide.pdf
Accessed August 2011
State Training Services 2011, ‘Glossary’, Department of Education and Communities.
https://www.training.nsw.gov.au/about_us/glossary.html Accessed August 2011
State Training Services 2011, Looking for Training? NSW Department of Education and Communities.
https://www.training.nsw.gov.au/promotions/index.html Accessed August 2011
Tocal College 2011, ‘Skills recognition (recognition of prior learning)’ http://www.tocal.nsw.edu.au/futurestudents/skills-recognition
Umali, D and Schwartz L 1994 ‘Public and Private Agricultural Extension – Beyond traditional frontiers’ World
Bank Discussion Papers, Washington DC, USA.
Vanclay, F 1992, The barriers to adoption often have a rational basis, Proceedings 7th ISCO Conference People protecting their land, Department of Conservation and Land Management (CALM), Sydney.
Vanclay, F and Lawrence, G 1995, Agricultural extension as social welfare, Rural Society, Vol.5, No.1 p.2033.
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
47
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
Informing and empowering those in horticulture to make better
business decisions
Richard Stephens
Horticulture Australia Limited, Level 7, 179 Elizabeth Street Sydney NSW 2000
Email: [email protected]
Abstract: This paper describes the process and summarises the results from assessments of
capacity building needs for horticulture industries represented by Horticulture Australia
Limited (HAL). To assess capacity building needs in horticulture, HAL developed an Industry
Development Needs Assessment (IDNA) process and tool kit. The nine step IDNA process
determines and prioritises industry development strategies and develops action plans. Key
lessons for capacity building or industry development in Horticulture are:



Each industry requires a tailored industry development plan based on its characteristics
and strategic direction.
Some of the biggest gains for industry are for initiatives beyond the farm gate.
Engagement with agribusiness in the awareness, extension and adoption process is vital.
Keywords: Industry Development; Capacity Building; Needs Assessment.
Introduction
Horticulture Australia limited (HAL) is an industry-owned company that invests approximately
$100 million annually in research and development (R&D) and marketing projects. HAL works
with over 40 horticulture industries from the fruit, nut, vegetable and ornamental sectors. Each
year HAL invests approximately $80 million in R&D, of which about $20 million is specifically
invested in facilitating the adoption of R&D by industry participants. The term used for this is
‘Industry Development’, otherwise known as ‘Capacity Building’.
HAL’s definition of Industry Development is ‘Informing and empowering those in horticulture to
make better business decisions’. It is about ensuring industry research and information can be
used and adopted by industry participants throughout the supply chain and therefore enable the
industry strategic plan to be implemented.
To ensure the investments in Industry Development are strategic and justified, HAL
commissioned an independent review of Industry Development. The review recommended an
industry specific, needs based approach for Industry Development and this was endorsed by the
HAL Board. To help industry specific assessment of industry development needs and to ensure
appropriate rigour and consistency, an Industry Development Needs Assessment (IDNA) Kit was
developed. The IDNA Kit outlines the nine step process, provides information and guidelines for
each step along with tools or worksheets (see Figure 1).
Industry Development Needs Assessment process
The nine step IDNA process is:









Establish Management and Oversight Group
Introduction and Start-up
Define Key Industry Characteristics
Review Industry Development Strategy Options
What Industry Development are we doing now?
Confirm New List of Industry Development Needs
Prioritise and Funding
Determine Delivery Options
Implementation Plan.
For each step of the process information, guidelines and worksheets have been developed. The
IDNA Kit contains a large variety of industry development examples and details six in-depth
case studies of successful industry development programs from within horticulture and
agriculture. In addition, the kit uses and builds upon research carried out by the Cooperative
Venture for Capacity Building (CVCB).
The CVCB was established in 2001 by the Rural Research and Development Corporations,
Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries and the Murray Darling Basin Commission.
Best practice in capacity building was researched and resulted in the identification of five
underlying capacity building strategies (Coutts et al. 2005):
48
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
Figure 1. Industry Development Needs Assessment Process, Guidelines and Tools
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
49
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
Facilitation – Industry members define their own goals and learning needs and
work with a facilitator to learn and improve. For example, this service may be
provided by Industry Development Officers or Group Coordinators.
Technological Adoption – Development of a specific technology, management
practice or decision support system. This may involve local trials, demonstrations
and/or field days.
Training – Specifically designed training programs and/or workshops to increase
understanding and/or skill levels. This could involve study tours.
Information – Access to a broad range of information, such as websites,
newsletters or conferences.
Consultant/Mentor – Where a mentor, consultant or advisor works over time with
a individual or group to improve their managerial, technological, social and/or
environment situation. This may include leadership development programs.
The examples and worksheets in the IDNA Kit highlight these five underlying capacity building
strategies and encourage a strategic approach to industry development. While some industry
development initiatives may incorporate more than one of these strategies, such as an Industry
Development Officer project, each of these strategies result in different outcomes and have
different management and evaluation processes. The aim is to ensure industries assess their
specific capacity building needs and develop a more strategic approach to industry development
based on their industry characteristics and strategic direction.
Previous Industry Development Activities
Prior to the development of the IDNA process and tool kit, many horticulture industries had a
large mix of separate industry development projects, including:






Industry Development Officers and/or Managers (IDOs or IDMs)
Study Tours (in Australia and/or overseas)
Conferences and seminars
Training workshops and/or field days
Leadership development seminars and/or scholarships
Communication initiatives, such as newsletters, magazines, websites, DVDs, etc.
While each of these types of industry development projects have the potential to provide
valuable outcomes for industry, management and evaluation of them varied considerably. Also,
it was recognised that maximum benefit could be obtained by combining them into a
coordinated strategic approach that directly links industry development initiatives with the
industry strategic plan and takes into account current industry characteristics.
Completing an Industry Development Needs Assessment
While the IDNA Kit details a complete process, industries were encouraged to modify and tailor
the assessment process to suit their specific needs. The level of complexity in carrying out an
IDNA was largely determined by the size of the industry and the majority of industries combined
their IDNA with a strategic planning process.
Individual industries were asked to ensure participation of key industry members who
collectively have a mix of industry knowledge, experience, strategic thinking and ability to
provide ideas from different perspectives. An independent facilitator was usually engaged to
ensure participation of the key industry members and drive and complete the IDNA process.
Outcomes from conducting Industry Development Needs Assessments
Many industries were initially reluctant to complete an IDNA, however most reported significant
benefit from the process. The needs assessments resulted in several common outcomes for
many of the horticulture industries, including:





50
A strategically focused industry development plan that directly links with the industry
strategic plan
Replacement of a mix of (often) unrelated projects with a nationally coordinated program
that includes regional or local delivery sub programs
A greater focus on the entire value chain, not just growers
Ensuring market information drives decision making throughout the entire value chain,
including on-farm business decisions
A recognised need to engage with the private sector and commercial providers
(agribusiness).
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
For some industries, this new approach has resulted in a move away from generic Industry
Development Officers (IDOs) providing on-farm technical advice to industry development
professionals having a specific focus and/or strategic role within the industry. While there was a
commonly identified need to engage with the private sector and commercial providers
(agribusiness) in facilitating the adoption of R&D, there is a high level of uncertainty about how
to do this and maintain information integrity and ensure no an unfair commercial advantage.
Examples of Industry Development programs that have been developed include:
The Citrus Industry employed a General Manager – Market Development who has
a key role in ensuring a focus on market information and coordinating regional
based industry development programs and Value Chain Coordinators.
The Vegetable Industry Development Program was based on the industry’s
strategic plan. An open tender process was undertaken for the delivery of Program
Coordination & several sub programs including: Consumers & Markets; Knowledge
Management; People Development & Leadership; and the regional delivery sub
programs of Innoveg. An additional regional delivery sub program, known as
Collaborative Industry Organisations, was also incorporated.
The Nursery Industry created a nationally coordinated industry development
program that sub-contracts services to state organisations with payments based on
recorded activities, outputs and outcomes.
The Macadamia Industry developed several linked programs to cover industry
communications, market development and regional delivery.
Acknowledgments
Organisations and individuals involved with the Cooperative Venture for Capacity Building
(CVCB). For more information on the CVCB and the research carried out, www.rirdc.gov.au and
search ‘capacity building’.
Richard de Vos from ‘de Vos Consulting’ who, along with Horticulture Australia Limited,
developed the Industry Development Needs Assessment Tool Kit.
Reference List
Coutts J, Roberts K, Frost F, Coutts A 2005, The role of Extension in Capacity building – What works and
why, Cooperative Venture for Capacity Building - Rural Industries Research and Development
Corporation, Canberra, ACT.
Horticulture Australia Limited 2008, Industry Development Needs Assessment Process – Guidelines and
Tools, Horticulture Australia Limited, Sydney, NSW.
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
51
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
Optimising a model to deliver financial incentives – the lessons
learnt through evaluation!
A McCaffery1, J Montgomery2, R Jackson3, S Bray4 and S Priest1
1
NSW Department of Primary Industries, Orange Agricultural Institute, Forest Road, Orange, NSW 2800.
2
NSW Department of Primary Industries, Balo St, Moree, NSW 2400.
3
NSW Department of Primary Industries, Australian Cotton Research Institute, Kamilaroi Highway, Narrabri,
NSW 2390.
4
NSW Department of Primary Industries, Abott St, Gunnedah, NSW 2340.
Email [email protected]
Introduction
The NSW Sustaining the Basin: Border Rivers-Gwydir pilot project (the Project) was an on-farm
irrigation infrastructure modernisation program conducted in northern NSW by the NSW
Department of Primary Industries (DPI) in partnership with the Border Rivers-Gwydir Catchment
Management Authority (BRG CMA).
The project was one of the first activities to be funded under the $300M Australian
Government’s commitment towards the NSW Farm Modernisation Program under the NSW
Priority Project. Irrigators received an 80 percent subsidy for the cost of the infrastructure
modernisation and returned 50 percent of the projected water savings to the Australian
Government for reallocation to the environment.
The project provided an opportunity for irrigators to upgrade irrigation infrastructure, improve
productivity, adapt to reduced water availability and ensure the long term sustainability of their
local communities.
Importantly, an extensive evaluation process was implemented during the project to capture the
irrigation industry’s responsiveness to irrigation modernisation-based water recovery programs
and will assist in developing future incentive projects in other NSW irrigation valleys.
Evaluation objectives of the Project
The project had three key result areas (KRAs) on which to base the overall success of
implementation. These KRAs guided the evaluation effort, allowed constant review of progress
and modification of the implementation process when required.
The KRAs were:
KRA1: To have sufficient irrigators prepared to trade a percentage of water
entitlements in return for incentives without negatively impacting on irrigators.
KRA2: Increase the capacity of irrigators and service providers to select and
manage appropriate infrastructure improvements and improve on-farm water use
efficiency.
KRA3: Build a tested model for water retrieval able to guide the development of
future water recovery projects in NSW.
Overall implementation model- outcomes and recommendations
An appropriate methodology based on previous experiences and the timeframes of the project
was developed (see below under 3.1). Some components of the initial model were modified over
time in response to irrigator engagement.
Methodology
The methodology used for implementing the Project included the following:










52
A partnership between DPI and BRG CMA
An Expression of Interest (EOI) for irrigation consultants and irrigators
A closed Tender process with two rounds
The funding of on-farm water management assessments
A capacity building program including training and demonstrations of new technology
A Tender assessment process including a prioritising process
An integrated communications plan
A comprehensive Monitoring Evaluation and Reporting (MER) Plan including an external
validation of MER
Risk assessment and a risk management process review
A probity review
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum


© Copyright AFBMNetwork
Due diligence assessment of successful Tenders
Contract negotiations and entitlement transfer of water to the Australian Government.
All of these components were considered necessary to:





Fully engage irrigators and service providers
Ensure the process was fair, equitable and inclusive of all stakeholders
Support the development of robust and viable infrastructure projects
Provide the skills and knowledge to realise the potential water savings on-farm
Provide robust information for future planning of similar projects.
In two tender rounds the Project received 54 Expressions of Interest and 38 Tenders. Fifteen
Tenders were recommended for funding, with 12 of these Tenders being approved for funding
by the Australian Government. These 12 then entered the contract phase with ten proceeding to
completion. The Project contributed approximately $5.8 million to the local economy including
irrigator contributions of approximately $1.2 million and 1,274 megalitres (ML) of water
entitlements were transferred to the Australian Government.
Timing and timeframes
The Project commenced on the 12th October 2009, coinciding with a number of seasonal
farming operations such as winter crop harvest and cotton planting. The first tender round
opened in January 2011 providing irrigators with just eight weeks to complete a tender
proposal. During this period irrigators could engage an approved consultant to complete onfarm water management assessments and participate in a variety of training. Timeframes were
tight. A second tender round opened in May 2011 where irrigators had six weeks to submit a
tender. This second round provided more time for irrigators who failed to submit a tender
proposal in round one to complete this, as well as complete their on-farm water management
assessments and attend relevant training.
Feedback from participating irrigators and service providers in all levels of evaluation indicated
the timing and timeframes between stages of the implementation model was a barrier to
achieving full engagement. Attrition rates occur in all processes, however given the time
constraints of the project the conversion of EOIs to the development of Tenders was considered
good at 45 percent.
Evaluation evidence highlighted that to maximise engagement of irrigators the implementation
model needs to be flexible, allowing participants to join at a time that suits them over a
prolonged timeframe in order to avoid conflict with key farming operations.
Legal processes
There were several legal processes and documents developed to support the implementation
process. This was critical to underpin the efficient implementation of the project in the
timeframe required and formalise/legalise the process given water entitlement was being
relinquished. It was essential that clear information was provided to irrigators once funding was
approved to facilitate implementation of their on-farm projects and maintain maximum
engagement.
Evaluation highlighted that the processes and documents developed for the project were useful
but there is still room for improvement. The main issues creating barriers to participation and
frustration to the irrigators were the lengthy delays experienced during the due diligence and
contractual phases of the project.
A special briefing was held for solicitors and financiers in response to issues with the Tender
process which provided an opportunity to obtain feedback on the administrative and legal
processes.
Despite all project communications encouraging irrigators to involve their business advisors
early in the process, business advisors felt they had not been briefed adequately by irrigators.
Consequently, they did not understand the requirements of the Tender application delaying
approval and ongoing processors.
Recommendations
Extensive evaluation of the various components of the implementation model provided the
following recommendations for future projects:


Time implementation around key farming activities, seasons and major holidays
Allow adequate timeframes for the various stages of the implementation model for
engagement, planning and decision making
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
53
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum


© Copyright AFBMNetwork
Undertaken a period of planning prior to the commencement of implementation to identify
client needs and develop any necessary information resources to address any
engagement barriers
Review and simplify project forms and templates to streamline the contractual phase
Maximise the engagement of stakeholders using a diverse range of communication
activities to a wider audience including specific stakeholder groups ie. business advisors
for the duration of implementation.
Expression of Interest for Approved Service Providers
The approved service providers (ASPs) process was included as a way to ensure quality control
of the consultancy work being undertaken for irrigators including on-farm water management
assessments. Project staff selected ASPs who had evidence of either an industry certification or
irrigation related degree and demonstrated experience in water use efficiency auditing at the
broadacre scale. Although the concept of having a selection and endorsement process for ASPs
to improve the quality of the outputs was sound it was evident that there was a wide range of
quality in the services provided. Generally, irrigators were very happy with their on-farm
assessments but some weren’t which was a reflection of the capacity and skills of the ASP
engaged.
Recommendations
Modifications of the ASP process would deliver better outcomes with simple modifications
including:




one-on-one meetings with the ASPs early in the implementation process to provide
guidance on what is a satisfactory on-farm assessment
specific training for ASPs to enhance service delivery and reporting
examples of industry best practice on-farm water management assessments including
examples of whole farm water balance calculations
development of a certification program for large area irrigation efficiency auditing.
Closed Tender process
The project used a competitive closed Tender process conducted under Catchment Management
Authority protocols for delivering the financial incentives. This approach was considered
appropriate to drive innovative approaches and allow irrigators to value their own water. It also
ensured probity guidelines were followed.
Opinion was divided between the value of a closed Tender process compared to a set price per
ML. Most were in favour of the process (58%) the remaining participants preferred the set price
per ML because it was more transparent. An external review of the project confirmed this
finding but also recommended there could be a place for a process that included both options to
engage a greater number of participators.
Issues encountered as a result of the process were:


Confidentiality of the price paid to participating irrigators was negated with the inclusion
of a second Tender round. Information is passed on very quickly in small regional
communities.
Sharing of information between partner organisations regarding Tender applications which
impacted on the implementation of the Communication and MER plans.
There were a range of reasons why participating irrigators did not submit a Tender the most
significant by far were the short timeframes and an unwillingness to give up entitlement.
Irrigators also indicated the short timeframes and unclear expectations posed a significant
barrier to adequately research and prepare the Tender document which was demonstrated by
the low percentage of successful Tenders in round one (23%). In response to this, DPI provided
feedback from the assessment process of the first Tender application and guidance to
unsuccessful irrigators and their ASP on the re-scoping of their Tender application for round two
which irrigators found highly valuable.
Tender assessment process
A formalised Tender assessment process was developed to assess the Tender applications using
a set of robust criteria to prioritise them for the recommendation of funding. This was to provide
consistency in the review process and to provide a prioritised list of Tenders to the Australian
Government in terms of validity, technical feasibility and value for money.
A Tender Assessment Committee (TAC) was convened by the BRG CMA with guidance from DPI.
The scoring and weighting system developed for assessment was well received and considered
54
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
very useful. Generally, the TAC believed the process used was professional with best practice,
rigor and consistency applied which is essential for ensuring public money is being invested into
feasible projects that won’t negatively impact on the irrigator, the environment or the
community. The TAC also identified the improvement in quality of the Tender applications from
round one to round two and supported the inclusion of providing one-on-one support to
irrigators and ASPs to develop their Tenders.
Recommendations
The following recommendations are suggested for future projects:





Use an application process including a competitive tender process rather than a closed
Tender process
Retain an EOI process for ASPs to provide a quality control mechanism
Conduct information sessions or workshops on proposal development with relevant
example documents and information resources early in the implementation process for
irrigators and ASPs.
Provide technical input to irrigators and ASPs during the proposal development stage to
ensure applications meet an agreed standard prior to submission for assessment
Retain an independent technical review process to ensure the projects are realistic,
technically sound and provide value for money.
Capacity building
The project used a risk management approach to ensure that irrigators undertook careful
planning and assessment of their proposals and had the ability to manage any newly funded
infrastructure. The project incorporated a comprehensive capacity building program that
included training workshops, irrigation technology demonstrations and development of a range
of irrigation information resources to complement other components of the program.
Feedback from irrigators indicated that while they are very interested in attaining new skills and
knowledge, they lacked the time to attend the wide range of opportunities available to them. In
response to this DPI developed a series of short videos that could be accessed form the DPI
website. The videos covered key points from various irrigation training events. Technical articles
were also published in a number of industry forums which covered a variety of irrigation related
topics.
Training program
Irrigators were asked to nominate their training priorities and the types of infrastructure they
were considering during the EOI process. A program of non-compulsory priority irrigation
training was developed based on the information provided. Despite feedback from irrigators and
ASPs that they lack time, the high number of irrigators and ASPs who participated in the
training events indicated there is a strong demand for information.
The majority of participants were satisfied with the course content and delivery of the various
workshops. Forty-five per cent of the Tender applicants indicated that the training assisted them
in developing their Tender application. They also found the information useful, resulting in
improved understanding of irrigation best management practice which could assist them in
developing future infrastructure projects.
Recommendations
The outcomes of the Project identified the following recommendations to improve future
capacity building programs to support incentive programs:




Retain an EOI process or similar to determine the training needs of participants prior to
implementation
Determine the level of skills and knowledge of participants prior to delivery of training and
customise the course appropriately
Review and develop new training modules to continue to meet client needs
Identify alternative methods of delivery and complementary resources to address the
time restrictions of clients.
On-farm water management assessments
Robust investigation is essential for planning purposes. The project included a financial incentive
to undertake a thorough on-farm water management assessment to identify and quantify where
water losses were occurring and to provide recommendations on all suitable infrastructure
options to address this. Irrigators who took up the incentive were not required to proceed to
Tender.
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
55
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
From the 54 EOIs received from irrigators, 44 assessments were requested and 35 were
completed representing 30 farm businesses. The assessments encompassed 23,500 ha of
irrigated land and 79 GL of Regulated River General Security Entitlement. Assessments
identified $12M of potential irrigation infrastructure investment with annual water savings of 5.9
GL. At the farm scale, this equates to around 0.25 ML of potential water savings per hectare per
annum. There was overwhelming evidence that on-farm assessments:







are highly valued by irrigators
assisted irrigators to identify irrigation infrastructure investment opportunities
increased irrigators awareness of the importance of on-farm water measurement and
record keeping
improved the quality of Tenders submitted
assisted the TAC to assess proposed on-farm projects
provide confidence for financiers in making financial decisions
are a lasting legacy and valuable resource for irrigators for future planning.
The quality of information presented in the audited assessments ranged from very basic to
detailed, robust assessments reflecting a very high standard and the use of an industry
recognised method. The large variability in assessment quality observed by DPI during the audit
process reinforces the need to continue capacity building efforts with both ASPs and irrigators to
improve the quality of information presented.
Recommendations




Longer timeframes between water management assessments and tender submission,
allowing at least three to four months for ASPs to complete the assessments
Develop and deliver capacity building activities for irrigators to promote the benefits of
on-farm water measurement and record keeping
Provide examples of an on-farm assessment reports completed to industry best practice
standard
Audit assessment reports early in the Project to ensure any issues are identified and
corrected quickly.
Conclusion
The Project was a complex and at times difficult initiative to implement given the time
constraints imposed. However, it is now clear that the irrigation industry are open and
supportive of infrastructure modernisation programs as a mechanism to build resilience in
farming businesses and regional communities and also return water to the environment.
The evidence from this project suggests that to develop feasible and cost effective on-farm
projects and realise the projected outcomes, incentive programs such as this need to be
supported by a range of other components including:





targeted training
approval and endorsement of service providers
rigorous on-farm water management assessments
streamlined and well thought out legal and administrative processes
comprehensive and diverse communications and engagement processes.
The inclusion of all these components will deliver positive outcomes for irrigators, irrigation
communities, government and the environment to ensure the outcomes from investment are
optimised.
56
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
Adapting the Cropcheck extension model to rice production
systems in Lao PDR
John Smith1, 2, John Lacy2 and Shu Fukai3
1
NSW Primary Industries, 449 Charlotte St, Deniliquin NSW 2710
EH Graham Centre, Charles Sturt University, Wagga Wagga NSW 2650
The University of Queensland, School of Agriculture and Food Sciences, St Lucia QLD 4067
Email: [email protected]
2
3
Keywords: Recording, measuring, practices, yield, extension, participatory.
Introduction
Cropcheck developed following the identification of limitations to the Transfer of Technology
(TOT) extension model which occurred through the 1970’s and into the early 1980’s (Lacy
2011). Irrigated wheat yields stagnated with high variability from year to year and no
understanding as to why this occurred. This was despite several communication methods (farm
visits, demonstrations, plot trials, field days, mass media communication and crop competitions)
being used to pass on latest research findings and farming techniques. Importantly, the TOT
model did not allow farmers to formulate their own questions, explore, learn and understand the
new technology in terms of their own world view (Webber and Ison 1995). Cropcheck evolved
for irrigated wheat using a participatory approach where famers were collaborators and team
players in the process. The model process is a planning, action and review cycle with extension
practitioners, farmers and researchers learning from their participation in growing each crop
(Lacy 2011).
Agriculture is important in Lao PDR where it accounts for approximately 50% of the Gross
National Product (NAFES 2005). However, the agriculture sector is changing with more farmers
transitioning from subsistence farming, where they produce food for consumption by their
family, to commercial farming, where they produce commodities for market (NAFES 2006). A
summary of the development of extension in Lao PDR (NAFES 2005) highlighted that for many
years (1960’s - 1990’s) most extension was based around TOT to improve production. However,
in 1996 the Pilot Extension Project started where there appears to be a change in extension
methodology. There is now recognition that farmers need to develop the capacity to analyse
their own situations and that new technologies should be introduced on a trial basis, for farmers
to evaluate themselves. Subsequent to this project there were many others that further
recognised that not all technologies were appropriate for local conditions; prioritisation of
project activities did not always meet farmers’ needs; and there was lack of ownership and poor
motivation among Provincial and District staff (NAFES 2005) and farmers.
NSW Department of Primary Industries (NSW DPI) extension practitioners were invited to
participate in an ACIAR funded project that was introducing a new method of sowing rice into
the irrigated lowland rice production system in the central province of Savannakhet. Cropcheck
was considered appropriate because it had the ability to develop information packages, utilising
management factors developed from the direct involvement with farmers. The planning, action
and review cycle utilised within Cropcheck with local extension staff, farmers and researchers
learning from their participation in growing each crop also overcomes many of the issues
highlighted by Millar and Connell (2010) and Stelling and Millar (2010) that can restrict adoption
of new technologies or long-term change.
Materials and methods
Cropcheck benchmarks the practices of high yielding crops and allows comparison with lower
yielding crops, where the target can be in terms of grain yield or in maximising production per
unit of resource input, i.e. resource use efficiency. One of the first steps and the ability to do
this requires crop records and measurements. Hence much of this project has been engaged in
surveying crops and developing a useful crop record that is easily understood by the farmers.
Survey development
In August of 2008 a meeting was held at Thassano Rice Research and Seed Multiplication
Centre. The manager of the centre invited; local staff, village and farm leaders and heads of
existing organisations such as water user groups from a number of villages. The purpose of the
meeting was to discuss the Cropcheck methodology and seek their involvement with the project
and the initial selection of farmers to be surveyed.
Following the meeting at Thassano, and prior to the 2008/09 dry season, villages were selected
in the districts of Champone, Songkhon and Xaybuli where direct seeding rice was being used or
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
57
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
had been introduced by a previous project. The villages were; Dong khan khou and Khor in
Champone district; Lahanum in Songkhon district; and Tonhen and Beungxe in Xaybuli district.
The survey used in the 2008/09 dry season was very comprehensive as a means of collecting as
much information as possible to indentify all management factors influencing rice production.
The information was collected by project staff during two visits, one early in the season and the
other corresponding with harvest to assist with collection of grain yield information from the
selected fields. In this first year in-field crop information was collected by project staff using the
rice rings that were developed and used in Australia for the collection of Cropcheck field
measurements. During this process there was often much interest in what the project staff were
doing in the fields.
To streamline the survey process for the 2009/10 dry season, farmers were asked at discussion
group meetings to identify what they thought were the key management factors influencing rice
production. This removed the need to record management factors that had no effect on grain
yield variation and allowed the survey to be reduced in size for the 2009/10 dry season. This
meant less time was spent surveying farmers and allowed farmers to be involved with the plant
counts and weed assessment that was carried out approximately 30 days after sowing. A
change back to transplanting occurred in the 2009/10 dry season and as a result questions were
added to the survey form in the 2010/11 dry season to provide management information about
the transplanted area, including labour/time estimates, and to seek clarification as to why the
change had occurred.
Initially the survey and survey results required translation for input into the database,
generation of reports and to make changes. However a Lao collaborator was resourced to
minimise the requirement of translation which significantly reduced the time taken to
interrogate the information and generate reports. It has also reduced the chance of erroneous
information entering the database.
Farmer selection
In the 2008/09 dry season 17 farmers from each district, with a range of rice grain yields, were
selected by local District Agriculture and Forestry Office (DAFO) staff. This was important
because of their local knowledge and to provide them with some ownership of the process.
Within each farm three fields were selected representing positions high, middle and low in the
farms topography. This provided a total 51 fields in each of the Cropcheck locations which, in
Lahanum, represented approximately 16% of the rice fields in the area.
During the 2009/10 dry season farmers were again selected by the local DAFO staff, who were a
mix of previously surveyed farmers and other farmers. However, the number of fields per
farmer was reduced to two. The number of farms per district was increased to 25 as a means of
increasing the variation in crop management and grain yield in the survey information collected.
In the 2010/11 dry season the number of fields was maintained at 25 with two fields per
farmer. However during this season fields were targeted for a comparison of the traditional
transplanting method of rice sowing and direct seeding using either broadcasting or drum
seeders. This change was made because during the 2009/10 dry season there was a significant
shift back from direct seeding to transplanting and the reason for this needed to be
investigated.
Farmer and DAFO staff consultation
One of the key elements of Cropcheck is ensuring that all collaborators have a sense of
ownership to provide them with continued enthusiasm, and importantly, because the farmers
have been involved with the collection of local data the information has higher credibility than
information produced from other areas. Whenever visits were made throughout the seasons
DAFO staff, village leaders and farm leaders were always invited and participated whenever they
could.
At the completion of each season results from the surveys were reported back to the growers at
discussion groups. This has not yet been done for the 2010/11 dry season. The main findings
were presented and questions asked of the farmers and DAFO staff to determine whether they
agreed or disagreed with the information. This provided a focus of discussion within the groups
and importantly allowed a measurement of the success of the survey in terms of the information
that was being collected.
The discussion groups were held in either the village leader’s homes or in local meeting huts.
The survey information was presented in poster format with most farmers coming prepared with
notebooks and taking notes during the presentation of information and discussions (Plate 1).
58
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
Often the meetings were attended by more farmers than had participated in the survey
collection.
Plate 1: Discussion group in Lahanum village with farmers taking notes of the
information presented
Photo: John Smith
Results
Over the three years of farmer surveys a total of 201 farmers and 453 fields across the three
districts were used for the establishment of a Cropcheck database for dry season irrigated rice
production in the central Savannakhet province of Lao PDR.
Key check identification
The survey information collected for the development of the Cropcheck database led to
unexpected results in terms of the identification of crop management factors that contributed to
grain yield variability. Keeping crops weed free up to 100 days after sowing showed grain yield
advantages; with the presence of weeds at this stage reducing grain yield from about 5.5t/ha to
1.5 t/ha in Champone and Xaybuli districts. Similarly the number of weed control operations
also influenced grain yield. In Xaybuli a possible key check is to maintain a weed free field up to
100 days after sowing using two weed control operations (Figure 1), although the economics of
the labour cost compared with the increase in yield would also need to be compared.
However, factors such as plant density and fertilizer management that play an important role in
Australia did not influence grain yield in the surveyed fields. This highlights one of the
limitations of the survey and is discussed in the issues that have limited the development of
Cropcheck in Lao PDR section.
Beneficial outcomes for farmers
Variability of grin yields within a farm was identified between the fields surveyed. Fields lower in
the farm topography yielded higher than fields with a high position in the farm. This occurred
regardless of farm position within the toposequence of the area and was a new finding for
researchers. Following discussions with the farmers it was discovered only the lower fields
maintained flooded water conditions between irrigation water applications. Irrigation is
restricted, due to pumping infrastructure, to water delivery every 7 – 10 days. There is an
opportunity for farmers to vary inputs or change the management of inputs between the areas
of different water management, although the capacity of farmers to be able to do this needs
also to be considered. This result also highlighted that Cropcheck needed to be adapted to
measure resource use efficiency, as it does with dryland cropping in Australia, instead of
maximising rice grain production and profitability as it does for the Australian rice industry.
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
59
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
Figure 1: Influence of the number of hand weeding operations on grain yield in
Xaybuli district over two seasons.
3700
2
24
Grain yield (kg/ha)
3500
3300
16
3100
2900
2700
2500
0
Number above bars = number of farms
1
2
3
Number of hand weed operations
During farmer discussions it was apparent many thought change was associated with increased
costs, which was often a barrier. An example of where this was not the case was observed
during field visits. Farmers had adopted the broadcast method of direct seeding but had not
been shown, or properly understood, how to sow seed evenly in large areas. This resulted in
areas of very high and very low plant populations, which restricted plant development (Plate 2).
Further training in uniform sowing could improve crop production at no extra cost.
Plate 2: Seeding rate variability within fields with areas of very high and very low
plant populations influencing grain yield
Photo: John Smith
There have been many different fertilizer management practices for either application rate or
timing of the application identified from the surveys. For example, within one of the districts as
many as 21 different practices for the 25 farmers surveyed were identified in a particular year.
Best practice fertilizer management would lead to fewer variable practices. This aparent lack of
understanding of fertilizer management has led to farmer training being conducted in 2011 as
well as factorial experiments during the 2010/11 dry season where the benefit of N application
up to 120 kg nitrogen ha-1 was demonstrated.
There has been limited information collected in the surveys on the influence of pests and
disease on production because farmers have not been able to clearly identify if plant symptoms
are the result of pests or disease. Thus another area of farmer training has been identified by
the process.
60
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
Issues that have limited the development of Cropcheck in Lao PDR
The duration of the project restricted the degree of development of Cropcheck. Initially the
project relied on members who were either remote to Lao PDR or were doing this in addition to
other main areas of work, which resulted in some outputs not being completed. As the database
developed it became apparent that a champion for Cropcheck development was required,
however the social structure within Lao PDR limits who can be utilized in this role. Cropcheck is
now being investigated for adaptation to rice in the wet season, in a separate project, and due
to the experience in this first project a suitable person was selected by Lao project management
to be the Lao champion for Cropcheck.
Cropcheck identifies variability in crop/pasture performance but in Lao PDR the development
has been restricted because of the degree of variability in crop management that has been
identified. Two main areas of crop variability have been in seeding rate and fertilizer
management. The seed used for sowing is sourced from the previous crop and at sowing a
subjective assessment of germination is made and the seeding rate is adjusted at that time. The
surveys identified seeding rates up to four times that of the recommended rate but the project
was not able to conduct germination tests to determine if these high rates were required. The
amount of variability in fertilizer management, and relative to this variability the sample size
used for the surveys has not been able to identify best fertilizer management practices. There is
also the added issue of the farm operations being done by hand rather than machine which adds
another level of variability.
The language barrier and requirement for translation has caused some issues. These were
related to the time that it took for the translation to occur and because not all words translate.
In some cases the intent of the question may have been lost or changed. The inclusion of a Lao
collaborator with good English skills has reduced the requirement for translation.
Discussion
The development of Cropcheck in Australia has seen the progression of industries, such as the
rice industry, for total production and also for water use efficiency. Cropcheck has also provided
a dramatic improvement in farmer understanding of the whole rice farming system rather than
individual components and operations within the system. The conduit that Cropcheck offers
between farmers, extension staff, government agencies and researchers plays an important role
even for basic farming practices such as sowing method. Broadcast sowing (Plate 2) offers
labour savings compared with transplanting and research has developed recommended sowing
rates for good quality seed. However, there is also a need for additional training in the
broadcast sowing technique to achieve an even plant stand. Practical field issues such as this
can be identified during the discussion group activities and field visits that occur during the
season as part of the Cropcheck methodology.
Cost, limited resources for DAFO staff, infrastructure restrictions and lack of mobility for some
DAFO staff are all limitations to the success of the system. Stelling and Millar (2010) found with
livestock industries that capacity building techniques such as Farmer Field Schools offer a high
benefit to cost ratio because they provide a learning opportunity and interaction for both
farmers and local staff. The discussion groups used in the Cropcheck methodology offer a
similar capacity building opportunity. The other limitations are more difficult to overcome
although may only be limitations for a finite period as other communications develop. For
example, Lao PDR has an extensive mobile phone system that could be utilised for crop
management updates as an alternate communication option besides the publication of results.
Conclusion
The irrigated rice farming system in Lao PDR has much more variability in crop management
than in Australia. Coupled with the restriction of time for the project this has limited the
identification of key checks that maximise resource use efficiency. However the process of farm
surveys, crop inspections during the season and farmer discussion groups have highlighted
areas where crop management can be improved through additional training. Importantly some
may lead to improvements in farm productivity with no extra cost to the farmer.
The potential benefits to the farming system that Cropcheck has highlighted are an advantage.
However, limitations outside of projects of; resources, labour, training and extension capacity
may restrict the development of the system into the future. Past Cropcheck training experience
shows project duration of a minimum of 10 years is needed to achieve technology and resource
change adoption.
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
61
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
Acknowledgements
The efforts of local Lao PDR project staff, Mr Sipaseuth, Mr Somphong, Leigh Vial and
Thongchanh Sourivong in the collection of survey data and assistance with field activities is
gratefully acknowledged.
References
Lacy J 2011, ‘Cropcheck: Farmer benchmarking participatory model to improve productivity’. Agricultural
Systems (in press, 2011).
Millar J and Connell J 2010, ‘Strategies for scaling out impacts from agricultural systems change: the case
for forages and livestock production in Laos’. Agriculture and Human Values, 27:213-225.
National Agriculture and Forestry Extension Service 2005, ‘Consolidating Extension in the Lao PDR’, Lao
Extension for Agriculture Project.
National Agriculture and Forestry Extension Service 2006, ‘Extension for Everyone! Why Laos needs an
inclusive approach to agricultural extension’, Lao Extension for Agriculture Project.
Stelling A and Millar J 2010, ‘Multi-criteria analysis of capacity building methods for Lao extension staff’,
Extension approaches for scaling out livestock production in Northern Lao PDR (ACIAR project
ASEM/2005/125), Institute for Land, Water and Society Charles Sturt University, Australia
Webber LM and Ison RL 1995, ‘Participatory rural appraisal design: conceptual and process issues’.
Agricultural Systems 47:107-113.
62
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
Accountability in action – responsible disbursement of grants for
environmental works on farms
Ashley Senn1, Brett Upjohn1, Scott Machar1, William Yiasoumi1 and Paul Bennett2
1 NSW Department of Primary Industries, Locked Bag 4, Richmond NSW 2753.
2 Hawkesbury Nepean Catchment Management Authority, PO Box 4515, Penrith Westfield NSW 2750
Email: [email protected]
Keywords: eutrophication, water quality, project management, audits.
Background and context to NSF
The project ‘Nutrient Smart Management’, normally referred to as ‘Nutrient Smart Farms’ (NSF),
was delivered by NSW Department of Primary Industries (DPI) in partnership with Hawkesbury
Nepean Catchment Management Authority (HNCMA) (NSW DPI 2011). It was one of seven
projects of the Hawkesbury Nepean River Recovery Program (HNRRP), which was funded by the
Australian Government’s ‘Water for The Future’ program. A sister project was Water Smart
Farms (WSF), also carried out by DPI. WSF & NSF were collectively called the ‘Smart Farms’
projects. They began in April 2009 and concluded in September 2011. The projects operated in
the lower Hawkesbury Nepean (HN) catchment, west of Sydney. The focus for funded onground works was commercial farmers but NSF engaged all types of rural landholders in the
project area.
The primary objective of NSF was to reduce the export to the river system of total nitrogen (N)
by 27 t/yr and total phosphorus (P) by 6 t/yr. The objective of HNRRP was to improve the
health of the Hawkesbury Nepean River by increasing environmental flows and reducing nutrient
export to the river system.
The range of project activities
NSF disbursed grants for on-ground works that reduce losses of N and P at farm boundaries and
therefore contribute to improved catchment health. NSF also provided free soil and water
testing, training and extension services to local farmers – with the aim of improving nutrient
management.
A research component focussed on nutrient movement on dairies and the effects of using
compost in field vegetable production. The complementary HNRRP project ‘Nutrient Export
Monitoring’ (NEM), led by NSW Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH) provided useful data.
The NEM project intensively monitored some of the NSF sites.
Monitoring, Evaluation & Reporting (MER) was a feature of the entire project. All on-ground
works involved ‘nutrient calculations’ (see later) and a final report, case study and farmer
survey. All group events were evaluated.
Types of on-ground works that were funded
These included:








Fencing to exclude cattle from natural waterways, often in combination with re-vegetation
‘Nutrient retention ponds’ and earthworks to control runoff on horticultural farms
Recycling of greenhouse drainage water
Soil conservation works (e.g. halt gully erosion or bank slumping)
Upgrades to dairy effluent systems
Supply of greenwaste compost, to improve soil condition and water infiltration
Modified fertiliser application (e.g. fertigation in an orchard)
Improved poultry manure storages on horticultural farms.
Project Management
NSF & WSF were led by a Project Manager with the assistance of three Team Leaders and
approximately 20 additional full or part-time staff in DPI and HNCMA. Around eight Full-time
equivalent staff worked in NSF. The seven HNRRP projects were managed by the Office of the
Hawkesbury Nepean (OHN). The Project Manager represented NSF and WSF on the HNRRP
steering committee and was constantly in contact with OHN, DPI and HNCMA management and
the funding body.
The Smart Farms projects had their own steering committee made up of representatives of
various farmer groups, DPI, HNCMA, OHN and the Australian Government. This committee met
on average quarterly - and more regularly early in the project. The Smart Farms management
team had weekly teleconferences for most of the life of Smart Farms.
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
63
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
Preliminary activities between writing the NSF project proposal and the formal start of the
project in April 2009 allowed work to begin at a rapid pace. We focussed on establishing clear
processes and promoting NSF to farmers and other stakeholders, such as rural contractors.
The most important documents developed were:











The NSF literature review
Expression of Interest (EOI) Form
Farmer database with contact details and comments
Farmer guidelines to obtaining a grant
Project proposal form
Proposal assessment matrix
Contract of works
Various spreadsheets for tracking the progress of proposals and actual projects
Specifications and tender for the supply of compost
Templates for milestone reports
Templates for Final Reports and Case Studies for individual on-ground works
The literature review of nutrient losses from farms focussed on runoff from diffuse sources. This
guided the range of activities, priorities for action and justification of the grants. Once entered
into the Farmer database, the details on the signed expression of interest form allowed project
staff to contact that farmer. Particularly in the early stages of the project, the database was
used to record whether a particular farmer had been visited and what activities they were
interested or involved in. The database allowed for the promotion of events, including by bulk
email and post distributions, and could be queried by many categories including industry group,
locality and surname.
The Farmer Guidelines was a five page document with an outline of NSF, list of eligible and
ineligible activities, map of the project area, assessment criteria and instructions on how to
apply for a grant. The project proposal form was a nine page template that contained details of
the applicant, land title, budget, risks and ‘nutrient calculations’. The description was typically
one-third to one-half of a page and there was a property map showing the location and extent
of the proposed works. The assessment matrix was a one page spreadsheet that scored projects
(very high=5, very low=1) for six weighted criteria, which are listed later. The matrix was
confidential and used only by the assessment panel and for general guidance by officers
developing proposals.
Centralised electronic libraries were used to share resources amongst project staff. Two libraries
housed latest versions of project material, such as templates, milestone reports and minutes of
meetings and these were accessible to DPI project staff. Considerable attention was paid to the
unambiguous naming of files.
Two powerful databases used by HNCMA were critical to the implementation of NSF incentive
grant contracts. Catchment Information Management System (CIMS), used to store non-spatial
information, and Land Management Database (LMD), used to store spatial information, are not
discussed in this paper.
Promoting NSF
NSF and WSF were extensively promoted using general and targeted field days, meetings
arranged by others (e.g. an industry group’s AGM), mass media, industry organisations, mail
outs and word-of-mouth. Many of the Smart Farms project officers were extension staff wellknown in the project area. Events were sometimes targeted to a particular sub-catchment or
locality. More often, they were targeted to a particular industry group, such as dairy farmers,
turf farmers or greenhouse vegetable growers. The project team included bi-lingual Project
Officers who assisted Arabic, Cantonese and Vietnamese-speaking farmers. This was of
particular benefit as there is considerable ethnic diversity in the project area, particularly in
relation to vegetable growers. Posters and other promotional material and standard templates
for publications and presentations were developed in the first few months of Smart Farms.
Developing proposals for funding
Potential grants were detailed in proposals and assessed by a panel of three, being the Project
Manager (Smart Farms), Team Leader (Incentive & Information Program) and Catchment
Coordinator, HNCMA. Grants ranged in size from $1 500 to $120 000, with most in the range $5
000 to $25 000. Farmers were required to make contributions, in cash or ‘in-kind’ (e.g. labour
for additional maintenance), that at least matched the size of the grant.
64
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
A typical scenario was that a farmer approached the Smart Farms team at a promotional event,
requesting a farm visit. Depending on the expertise and availability of staff, one or more Project
Officers made the visit and discussed possibilities with the farmer. Frequently, a decision was
made that the proposed works did not meet NSF objectives. For example, the potential nutrient
export reductions appeared small or absent. In the case where appropriate works, adequate inkind contributions and an indicative budget that was attractive to the applicant were identified,
a proposal was then developed. It was up to the applicant to obtain quotes for items. In more
than half of cases where suitable works were identified and the applicant was agreeable to enter
a contract, a proposal was successfully developed.
Draft proposals were revised in consultation with the applicant and Team Leader, NSF as details
were finalised. Once agreement on a suitable proposal was reached, it was sent to the NSF
assessment panel. This panel met once per month and began meeting five months into NSF.
Assessing proposals
The six criteria used to assess proposals were:






Technical feasibility
Project sustainability – will the works result in a short or long term improvement?
Applicant’s resources and commitment
Project focus – on environmental benefit as well as private benefit
Connectivity to waterways
Comparison of the size of the grant to a ‘nominal value’ of the expected reductions in
nutrient export (see below).
Nutrient calculations and the ‘nominal value’ of works
In order to meet its nutrient targets and stay within budget, NSF needed to ensure that it did
not consistently spend more than a given proportion of its budget to achieve less than the same
proportion of its nutrient reduction targets (of 27 000 kg N and 6 000 kg P p.a.). After first
applying a ‘safety factor’ of one-third of the grants budget, the remaining amount was simply
divided by the kilogram targets to derive ‘nominal values’ of $35/kg N and $150/kg P. These
values were then used in one of the six assessment criteria for proposals. By multiplying the
expected reduction in nutrient exports by a value for those losses of N & P, a nominal value was
determined for the whole proposal. This value was then compared to the size of the requested
grant. ‘Nutrient calculations’ to determine current exports of N & P and the likely reductions in
nutrient loss once works were completed are the subject of an accompanying paper.
The works contract and payment
Approved projects were developed into contracts that normally ran for ten years. Contracts
were between HNCMA, which disbursed all grant monies, and applicants. All landowners were
party to the contracts. Where the applicant was not the landowner or not an owner of all the
lots where work would occur, a ‘three-party’ contract was developed. In most cases, a simpler
‘two-party’ agreement was produced.
Contracts contained standard clauses relating to doing the specified works to a suitable
standard, having insurance and maintaining the newly-installed infrastructure. The details of the
approved proposal, such as budget and description of works, were also placed in the contract.
Farmers tended to be paid one month after they returned their signed contract. For projects
deemed low risk and with a grant under $20 000, they were paid ‘up front’, that is, before the
works commenced. It was the farmer’s responsibility to expend the grant funds and complete
the works. Applicants were required to keep receipts, a simple diary and document progress of
their works, including the use of photographs from defined positions.
Tracking the progress of works
Spreadsheets and CIMS were used to keep track of individual works projects. Progress of NSF
as a whole was reviewed via a progress sheet that detailed the numbers of projects approved
and under development. This sheet was discussed at the weekly teleconferences. ‘Tracking
sheets’, generated by Crystal Reports from the data CIMS, provided weekly updates of the
progress of individual works projects and aspects of NSF as a whole, such as funds expended
and reductions in nutrient export calculated to result from works projects approved to date.
What happened
The offer of a substantial grant to undertake on-farm works that made business sense as well as
being environmentally responsible was favourably received by many farmers. Despite this, it
was generally the NSF Project Officer, not the farmer, who progressed the development of a
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
65
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
project proposal. NSF team members were frequently asked to do tasks that were the
responsibility of the applicant, such as arrange quotes from likely contractors and find suppliers
of materials. Some assistance was provided but decisions on project options were always the
responsibility of the farmer.
Several one-on-one visits were often required to design the works in more detail and reassure
the farmer that the effort involved was worthwhile. For example, that an extra two hours per
fortnight handling dairy wastes would be compensated by more pasture growth in the new
dispersal areas and that, regardless of this benefit, responsible stewardship necessitated that
effluent be handled so as not to contaminate local waterways.
Farmers’ engagement ranged from those who had a clear idea of a potential project and all its
components to those who said “Come and have a look and see what you can do” (i.e. visit the
farm and identify works that might be funded). Commitment levels ranged from those who set
up a separate bank account for their grant and wrote a comprehensive report to those who did
the minimum.
The disbursement of grants was not a routine activity for DPI but was for HNCMA. However, the
intricacies of developing proposals and funding certain kinds of activity were new to both
organisations. Only by actually ‘doing the work’ did we recognise and then address all necessary
aspects of the full range of funded on-ground works. If a farmer’s expenses went over budget,
the farmer paid the additional costs and, if under budget, the farmer’s cash contribution was
reduced or unspent funds were returned. When developing proposals, we tried to get a
reasonable and accurate budget that minimised the chance of a farmer being out of pocket but,
at the same time, ensured their eventual contribution was adequate and also stretched our
bucket of money further. It was pleasing to see how often project budgets were within a few
percent of actual expenditure, as detailed in receipts.
Staged payments, typically 80% up front and 20% at full completion, were used for larger and
riskier projects. One-quarter (30) of the non-compost projects had 80/20 payments and one
troublesome project had five staged payments. In hindsight, a greater use of staged payment
may have helped control the progress of a few projects. On the other hand, it was helpful to
many of our farmers to receive the money for works up front. Overall, the initial payments sped
up rather than slowed down the eventual completion of the many on-ground works.
Due to thorough quality control procedures before submission to the NSF assessment panel,
very few (<5%) proposals were rejected. However, up to 20% had conditions imposed such as
ensuring a permit is obtained for works in a riparian area before the funds are transferred to the
farmer. Around 10% of approved projects were later withdrawn by the applicant. In some
cases, inadequate consultation could have been a factor – with the farmer never really
committed to the project and the NSF team, to some extent, too focussed on ‘getting money
out the door’. In a few cases, the farmer was uncomfortable to enter into a 10 year contract.
Often a generic contract template was provided to committed applicants, to ensure they were
aware of requirements.
For each works project, a final report included receipts, the applicant’s assessment of the
administration of NSF and a statutory declaration. Comments in the report were by exception.
For example, to the question ‘Has your project varied from what was originally approved?’
details were only provided if there were changes. A mandatory site inspection would reveal if
the works were complete and operational (e.g. we insisted that machinery be turned on) and
the aim of the project achieved.
Three lessons:
1.
2.
3.
By having standardised proposal documentation and assessment criteria from the early
stages of NSF, potential recipients of grants were treated in an equitable manner.
Live databases can be a tremendous resource and they help to ensure a consistent
approach is taken by a project team.
Repeated, one-on-one contact was often necessary for our clients, who are mostly of nonEnglish speaking background.
References:
NSW
DPI
2011.
The
Smart
Farm
www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/agriculture/resources/smartfarms
66
Projects,
Retrieved
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
from:
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
Assessing on-ground works that reduce farm nutrient exports
Ashley Senn, John O’Connor, Warwick Dougherty and Scott Machar
NSW Department of Primary Industries, Locked Bag 4, RICHMOND NSW 2753.
Email: [email protected]
Keywords: Eutrophication, water quality, environmental grants.
Introduction
The project ‘Nutrient Smart Management’, normally referred to as ‘Nutrient Smart Farms’ (NSF),
was one of seven projects of the Hawkesbury Nepean River Recovery Program (HNRRP), which
was funded by the Australian Government’s ‘Water for The Future’ program. The objective of
NSF was to improve rural land management and consequently reduce export to the river system
of nitrogen (N) by 27 t/yr and phosphorus (P) by 6 t/yr - and thereby contribute to improved
health of the Hawkesbury Nepean River, which is considered stressed. The focus was on
commercial farmers but NSF engaged with all types of rural landholders in the lower
Hawkesbury Nepean catchment, west of Sydney.
NSF was delivered by NSW Department of Primary Industries (DPI) in partnership with
Hawkesbury Nepean Catchment Management Authority (HNCMA). It began in April 2009 and
concluded in September 2011. NSF disbursed $3.5 m in grants for 187 ‘on-ground works’ that
reduce losses of N and P at farm boundaries. The project also provided free soil and water
testing, training and extension services to local farmers – with the aim of improving nutrient
management.
A research component focused on nutrient movement on dairies and the effects of using
compost in field vegetable production. The complementary HNRRP project ‘Nutrient Export
Monitoring’ (NEM), led by NSW Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH) provided useful data.
The NEM project intensively monitored some of the NSF sites to quantify nutrient exports from
different farm types prior to implementation of the works.
Calculating reductions in nutrient exports from farms, resulting from the works
Before NSF started, a literature review was completed to support the project application and
outline intended activities. The review examined nutrient export rates (kg N and P/ha/yr) in
surface runoff by agricultural activity – field vegetables, dairy, intensive grazing (hobby farms),
extensive grazing; and then considered the potential reductions in nutrient export that could be
achieved by activities including stock exclusion fencing, improved fertiliser management,
increased perimeter vegetation and the application of compost. NSF adopted export rates and
percentage efficiencies that were averages of the findings of studies deemed relevant.
Calculations of nutrient export reduction relied upon estimating the current nutrient load and
then applying one or more discounts due to site factors such as perimeter vegetation, distance
to property boundary, the presence of a dam, soil fertility, and so on. ‘Discounts’ were best
estimates based on site inspection and available data. Nutrient loads were based on export
rates for particular land uses, cattle numbers and time (e.g. hours/week) in certain areas,
actual N and P in the reported amounts of fertiliser used, etc.
Types of on-ground works that were funded
These fell into ten categories:










Fencing to exclude cattle from natural waterways, with or without revegetation
Revegetation (native trees, shrubs, groundcovers) and pasture establishment
‘Nutrient retention ponds’ and earthworks to control runoff on horticultural farms
Recycling of greenhouse drainage water
Soil conservation works (e.g. halt gully erosion or bank slumping)
Upgrades to dairy effluent systems and dairy laneways
Supply of greenwaste compost, to improve soil condition and water infiltration
Use of turf aerators (to improve water infiltration)
Modified fertiliser application, including better targeting (e.g. fertigation in an orchard)
Improved poultry manure storages on horticultural farms
Developing proposals for funding
A typical scenario was that a farmer approached NSF at the time of a Smart Farms promotional
event, requesting a farm visit. Depending on the expertise and availability of staff, one or more
Project Officers made the visit and discussed possibilities with the farmer. Frequently, a decision
was made that the proposed works did not meet NSF objectives because the activity was
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
67
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
routine farm practice or the potential nutrient export reductions appeared small or absent.
Some vegetable farmers asked for new chicken manure spreaders but, even with a change in
usage, this was considered not a suitable activity to fund. In the case where poultry manure
storage was away from drainage lines and in the middle of a farm, nutrient losses were already
minor and the amount of possible improvement was also minor. Where a wetland appeared to
be doing a good job of intercepting nutrients the excavation of a ‘nutrient retention pond’ (and
water source for the farmer) would lead to greater nutrient loss – at least in the short and
medium terms. Examples of work such as these were not funded.
In cases where beneficial works were identified and there was an adequate in-kind contribution
and an indicative budget that was attractive to the applicant, a proposal was developed. The
standardised proposal form included a description, landowner’s details, budget, property map
and nutrient calculations detailing estimates of current losses of N and P and the expected
reduction in those losses once the works were complete.
A panel assessed proposals according to the following six criteria:






Technical feasibility
Project sustainability – will the works result in a short or long term improvement?
Applicant’s resources and commitment
Project focus – on environmental benefit as well as private benefit
Connectivity to waterways
Comparison of the size of the grant to a ‘nominal value’ of the expected reductions in
nutrient export (see below).
In order to meet its nutrient targets and stay within budget, NSF needed to ensure that it did
not consistently spend more than a given proportion of its budget to achieve less than the same
proportion of its nutrient reduction targets (of 27 000 kg N and 6 000 kg P p.a.). After first
applying a ‘safety factor’ of one-third of the grants budget, the remaining amount was simply
divided by the kg targets to derive ‘nominal values’ of $35/kg N and $150/kg P. These values
were then used in one of the six assessment criteria for proposals. By multiplying the expected
reduction in nutrient exports by a value for those losses of N & P, a nominal value was
determined for the whole proposal. This value was then compared to the size of the requested
grant.
Most grants ranged in size from $5 000 to $25 000. Farmers were required to make either cash
or ‘in-kind’ contributions, such as labour at installation or for additional maintenance that at
least matched the value of the cash grant. Approved projects were developed into contracts
between HNCMA and the applicant – and any other owners of the land where the works would
occur. Contracts specified that the funded practice had to be maintained or implemented for ten
years. NSF was entirely voluntary.
Discussion
NSF relied upon farmers to provide details of fertiliser use, average volumes of poultry manure
stored, volumes of water used in greenhouses, the movement of cattle and changes in the sizes
of eroding gullies. When combined with a Project Officer’s own observations of a site and
averages from relevant published information, a reasonable estimate of nutrient movement
could be surmised. Before providing two worked examples of the calculation of nutrient exports
and reductions in export, it is warranted to discuss considerations relating to some of the
funded activities.
Dairy farms tend to be large properties with high volumes of nutrient turnover, including from
bought-in feed. In the Hawkesbury Nepean catchment, dairy farms have large accumulations of
nutrient resulting from many years of operation. NSF considered the likelihood that nutrient
exports would increase, e.g. as effluent dispersal areas became saturated with P, given the
same infrastructure, even if milk production did not increase. Funding was not provided where
production was increasing or nutrient management was very poor, and therefore any remedial
works could be considered the responsibility of the farmer. Instead, NSF focussed on improving
effluent management systems where the farmer was operating at industry standard. NSF
funded works that more readily dispersed N & P in solid and liquid dairy wastes over receiving
areas that could best absorb the additional nutrient.
Some gullies on low intensity grazing properties were spectacular but, because the
concentration of nutrient in the eroding subsoil was so low, the amounts of exported N & P were
also low. In the following example of halting gully erosion, the nominal value for the project is
less than $2 000 - suggesting only a small grant is warranted. In NSF, ten gully projects were
funded and these all involved higher losses of nutrients. In the project area as a whole, soil
68
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
erosion is less of a problem than in many other agricultural districts. Many farmers had owned
their properties for considerable time and were able to provide reliable information on the
increase in size of a gully and therefore the likely rate of erosion.
In projects involving stock exclusion from waterways, the reductions in N and P export due to
improved riparian vegetation tended to be much smaller than those directly due to stock
exclusion. As the cattle were kept out of the water this prevented the direct deposition of
nutrients by excretion. In many cases, only a small area of catchment drained through the
fenced off area. For example, if part of a levee of a major waterway was fenced but the nearest
tributary, draining much of the farm and feeding into the major waterway, was outside the area
of improvement, then the catchment for the denser riparian vegetation would, for example, be a
block 200 m x 30 m (= 0.15 ha), not the 30 ha of grazing area on a property.
The project area included many greenhouse enterprises. Greenhouse operations are very small
in area and tend to be recently established but they can be relatively large exporters of
nutrient. A typical enterprise has 5 000 m2 of greenhouse, water use should be around 7
megalitres/year annum and drainage 30% of this figure (Badgery-Parker and James 2010), i.e.
2.1 ML/yr. Concentrations of total N and P in drainage water were often found to be very high,
e.g. 140 and 15 mg/L respectively, and on 2 ha blocks there was often limited opportunity to
intercept these nutrients before they left the property. On the other hand, many of these small
farms discharged into drainage lines that were only poorly connected to permanent, and even
intermittent, waterways. On greenhouse properties NSF funded works to reuse drainage water
on outside cropped areas, where possible, or back into greenhouses. In the latter case,
expensive disinfection was nearly always required due to the risk of plant disease.
The Nutrient Export Monitoring (NEM) project intensively monitored eight of our sites. Where,
for example, 50 ha of vegetable field drained through a single large pipe to the Hawkesbury
River, losses of N & P were unambiguous. However, the relationship of those losses over several
months to long term averages is less clear cut. We had hoped to measure comparisons of
‘unimproved’ and ‘improved’ sites during the 2½ year life of NSF but this did not happen due to
a lack of suitable paired sites and delays in completing work. However, NEM did provide data on
nutrient export rates from turf farms, which were not covered in the NSF literature review, and
refined nutrient export rates for other land uses by combining data collected at NSF sites with
literature values. The NEM project’s refined nutrient export rates were similar to those defined
in the NSF literature review.
An examples of nutrient calculations in NSF - Stock exclusion fencing
The nutrient calculations for fencing projects could be quite involved. Depending on the site, the
justification for fencing proposals was one or more of the following:
A land use figure This applied only to the catchment that drained through the fenced area. This
catchment did not have to only be on the applicant’s property. Catchment that did not drain
directly through the zone to be improved was not counted. Nutrient export rates of 4.4 kg N and
0.9 kg P/ha/year (NSF literature review, hobby farm) were the default figures to use. These
were applied only to the grazed area. There was a lower figure for bushland and a higher figure
for more intensively grazed situations (the figure for dairy farms from the NSF literature review
was 5.3 kg N and 3.5 kg P/ha/yr).
A factor was applied to the nutrient runoff figures. This factor accounted for an improvement in
vegetation in the fenced off zone and therefore more nutrient capture before it entered a
natural body of water or crossed a property boundary. The number (from the NSF literature
review) used was 46% for N and 39% for P - around half effectiveness.
A direct disturbance figure (only for cattle, not sheep or alpacas) This was to do with a certain
number of head being in or immediately next to a natural body of water (e.g. on the water side
of a bank). This factor was not normally applied to a dam. The default option was to multiply a
figure for excretion of 100 kg N and 15 kg P p.a. per adult animal (e.g. 500 kg cow) by the
average amount of time in water – as reported by the landowner. Averaged over a year, cattle
might spend a couple of hours a day (2 hr ÷ 24 hr = 8%) in or right next to water or they may
spend almost no time there – it depended on factors such as shade and alternate water sources.
We increased the time factor by 50% to allow for a greater propensity by cattle to excrete when
in or near water (8% increased by 50% = 12%).
A figure to do with erosion Erosion occurs as animals clamber up and down banks and from
over-grazed paddocks. The erosion figure was only applied to severely degraded sites. In
general, it was double counting to apply both a land use figure and a soil erosion figure to
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
69
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
grazed paddocks but reductions in sheet erosion were counted when targeted remediation was
carried out.
Example nutrient calculation
A property has, on average, 15 head of cattle, 10 sheep and a couple of horses. They graze 30
ha of a total of 50 ha, the remainder is undisturbed bushland. The property has six paddocks.
The livestock spend half their time in two paddocks that have a permanent creek as one
boundary. There is little shade in this paddock and no water except that of the creek. The
proposal is to fence all of the riparian area (600 m) and provide off-stream water. The creekside vegetation is quite sparse and degraded. In one place where the animals regularly obtain
water, the bank is actively eroding. Part of the paddock behind this is bare and also eroding.
Land use:
It seems virtually all of the 30 ha drain through the riparian area. Use hobby farm figures from
NSF literature review (4.4 kg N and 0.9 kg P/ha/yr) and apply efficiency factors of 46% for N
and 39% for P as the fenced off vegetation captures more of the sediment and nutrients in the
farm’s runoff.
N: 30 ha x 4.4 kg/ha x 46% = 61 kg
P: 30 x 0.9 x 39% = 11kg
Direct disturbance:
No figure for the sheep and horses.
Use 100 kg N and 15 kg P per head per year for the 15 cattle. Multiply this by half their time in
the creekside paddocks and 12% because the landholder says that, averaged over winter and
summer and when in these paddocks, the animals spend two hours a day in the water or on the
banks.
N: 15 head x 100 kg/hd/yr x 50% in the paddock x 12% = 90 kg
P: 15 x 15 x 50% x 12% = 14 kg
Erosion:
According to the landholder, a section of bank around 20 m long and 4 m width (= 80 m2) has
retreated about half a metre in the last ten years. 80 m2 x retreat of 5 cm/year (= 0.05 m) x
bulk density of 1.6 t/m3 (for undisturbed and subsoil) = 80 x 0.05 x 1.6 = 6.4 t (or 6 400 kg).
Additionally, around 0.25 ha of land next to this area, also very close to the creek, is bare and
eroding. This will be fenced off. Assume current soil loss of 25 t/ha, minimal soil loss in the
future. In this case, erosion is 25 t/ha x 0.25 ha = 6.25 t (= 6 250 kg)
The test result for this riverbank soil is 0.14% total N and 0.022% total P. Therefore, losses due
to erosion are:
N: [6 400 + 6 250 = 12 650 kg] x 0.14% (= x 0.0014) = 18 kg
P: [6 400 + 6 250 = 12 650 kg] x 0.022% (= x 0.00022) = 3 kg
Total export for the site is:
N: 61 + 90 + 18 = 169 kg p.a.
P: 11 + 14 + 3 = 28 kg p.a.
Under NSF guidelines, the nominal project value (i.e. size of grant that is warranted) is:
[169 kg N x $35/k = $5 915] plus [28 kg P x $150/kg = $4 200] = $10 115
Depending on all factors, including the anticipated cost of works and conservation value, a grant
of up to around $10 000 would be justified.
Summary
The range of funded works in NSF and the issues in implementing and assessing these are too
great to discuss in one paper. However, some generalisations to guide other projects seeking to
reduce nutrient runoff from farmland are made.
Depending on the characteristics of an enterprise and site, ten or more kinds of activity could be
used to reduce nutrient exports to a significant degree and in a cost-efficient manner – given
our level of funding. The soils of our project area tend to lose N & P via surface runoff, not
leaching, and therefore we needed to observe where water flowed. Site inspections and the
advice of resident farmers were required to design our projects. Some relevant published
70
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
studies were found and averages from these were applied in our nutrient calculations. Our
general approach was to determine the size of a nutrient load then apply site-specific factors to
estimate N & P losses from a farm.
While it might be argued that improvements on a farm rather than catchment scale are
inadequate to achieve significant environmental benefit, we contend that a jigsaw (or
catchment) cannot be completed without first handling individual pieces (or farms). Where a
project such as NSF is voluntary and land is in private ownership, it is necessary to work at the
level of individual farm enterprise. Collectively, our 187 on-ground works under NSF have
delivered reductions more than double our targets for less export of N & P. Local farmers now
have many completed examples of desirable works with which to raise the environmental
performance of agriculture in the lower Hawkesbury Nepean catchment.
Three lessons:
1.
2.
3.
Quantifying nutrient losses in runoff from farms need not be in the ‘too hard’ basket. With
background information and site assessment, it is possible to make reasonable
determinations of losses (that can then guide prioritisation and the assessment of
investments) without resorting to expensive, medium-term research or monitoring
programs.
Staff require training and expert information so that reasonable judgements on current
and likely future nutrient exports can be made.
Among the most beneficial works were the capture and re-use of greenhouse drainage
water, stock exclusion fencing where cattle spent a lot of time in waterways and upgrades
to effluent management systems on long-established dairy farms.
Acknowledgements
Brett Upjohn, Manager of DPI’s Smart Farms projects, for leadership and the capable execution
of many necessary tasks that allowed NSF to do its work.
Brendan Haine of the Nutrient Export Monitoring project, NSW Office of Environment and
Heritage for extensive field support and editorial comment.
References:
NSW
DPI
2011.
The
Smart
Farm
Projects,
Retrieved
from:
www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/agriculture/resources/smartfarms
Badgery-Parker J and James L 2010, Commercial Greenhouse Cucumber Production, NSW Department of
Industry & Investment.
Bannerman SM and Hazelton PA 1990, Soil Landscapes of the Penrith 1:100 000 sheet, Soil Conservation
Service, Sydney NSW.
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
71
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
Profitable biodiverse wool production systems for the Northern
Tablelands of NSW: science and extension working together
K Forge-Zirkler, R Ballard, and M Taylor
Southern New England Landcare, PO Box 85, Armidale, NSW 2350
Email [email protected].
Introduction
In order to achieve nature conservation and biodiversity protection effectively on a significant
scale, it must occur outside of reserved areas on farming lands: it needs to become an integral
part of the farm production system.
The Land, Water & Wool Northern Tablelands Project (2002-2006) quantified the ways in which
biodiversity and nature conservation on farms increased production and profit, increased
awareness among the wider community, and in particular, increased adoption of best practice
among wool growers on the Northern Tablelands.
Objectives of the project
Project leader, Dr Nick Reid at the University of New England, and project partners Southern
New England Landcare and the Centre for Agricultural and Resource Economics (CARE), used an
action research approach to:
1.
2.
3.
Document and publicise the relationship between biodiversity and production on three
outstanding “Case Study Farms” and eight “Testimonial Farms”.
Work with 15 “Monitor Farms” to record and analyse various production and biodiversity
outcomes over a two year period. This information was the basis of further extension
work.
Increase the general public’s awareness of the very positive relationships between
biodiversity and production.
From the beginning, the project employed a Project Facilitator (separate to project technical
staff), to facilitate landholders and technical experts to work together in a way that values local
knowledge in all stages of the project. Project activities were underpinned with sound science
and dedicated technical experts at all times. A local steering committee was facilitated to design
the ‘extension’ into every aspect of the project, so that it was rolled out as the project occurred,
rather than as a separate process after the project was completed.
We believe this combination of factors is what enhanced the project’s visibility, acceptance and
adoption among both the farming and wider New England communities. The project was wellreceived both locally, and nationally, with a repeat screening on ABC’s Landline program (ABC
Landline, 2007).
Communication is key
Because the project was in part funded by Australian Wool Innovation LTD (AWI) and therefore
grower levies, a key communication challenge for this project was that local wool growers
wanted reassurance that the project was targeting their needs and that practical information of
use to them was being gathered. Growers made it clear that a whole farm focus was important
to them, and that the information was to come from real commercial farms, not experimental
farms or research institutes. They also wanted the information, results and implications of the
project available in readily accessible formats that they could easily understand.
For these reasons, the project facilitated a local steering committee made up of ‘technical
experts’ (both academic and local agribusiness consultants) and wool growers to come up with a
communication and extension plan. So that everyone was ‘on the same page’, the steering
committee decided on a project mission statement:
To demonstrate to Northern Tablelands wool producers and the wider community,
the compatibility between biodiversity and profitability, the benefits of continual
learning in natural resource management, and to illustrate management options
that assist in achieving both goals.
And a slogan:
Creating wealth through wool profits in an enhanced environment.
72
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
The project’s communication goal was to provide timely and relevant advice to the project’s
primary clients about the relationships between profitable wool production and biodiversity
conservation on the Northern Tablelands of NSW.
To achieve this goal, a number of key activities were decided on:
A Project Steering Committee of nine local wool grower families and agency and
private extension personnel was formed to direct the project and advise the
research team. A program of quarterly to 6-monthly meetings of the committee
took place through the life of the project. The schedule of meetings listed the
specific outcomes to be achieved by each meeting and the requirements of each of
the technical team in terms of preparing information for committee members, to be
submitted in business papers to members about 1 week prior to each meeting date.
A quarterly article and press release summarising project progress and inviting
feedback from wool growers was prepared for Southern New England Landcare’s
newsletter, Landchat, each quarter. At that time, Landchat had a mailing list of 650
recipients, comprising 550 landholders (including an estimated 70% of wool
growers in southern New England) and 100 extension officers, school Landcare
group contacts and related personnel. This article was also forwarded
simultaneously to other Tablelands Landcare networks, producer groups, and AWI
and Land & Water Australia (LWA) for insertion or publication in their mailouts and
newsletters.
The quarterly article and press release was also circulated to local and regional
newspapers, and to the ABC regional radio’s Rural Report. Important articles and
press releases of more general interest were also sent to The Australian and The
Land newspapers.
A segment at each quarterly meeting of Southern New England Landcare
Inc (SNELCC) was devoted to this project. Twenty-eight Landcare groups are
represented at SNELCC meetings, where issues relevant to Landcare are discussed.
The segment updated Landcare group representatives about the project and its
progress.
Field days, local producer on-farm discussions and farm inspections/walks
were scheduled throughout the project. One major field day was scheduled at each
case study farm during the project and attracted in excess of 100 participants. One
attracted 170 participants. The primary objectives of these events were (i) to
inform local and out-of-region wool growers of best management practices (BMPs)
for wool profits and biodiversity conservation on real farms by demonstration, (ii)
for growers to practice biodiversity monitoring skills, (iii) to obtain feedback from
growers about the advantages and disadvantages of the BMPs on display, and (iv)
to receive feedback from growers about the particular BMPs they use on their own
properties. Images of three major project field days may be seen in Plates 1, 2 and
3.
Plate 1: Field day participants learn about water quality and wetland biodiversity
findings of the LWW NT (2002-2006) project at the Case Study Farm ‘Nant Lodge’.
Source: Karen Forge-Zirkler, 2004.
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
73
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
Plate 2: Case Study Farm ‘The Hill’ boasts the honour of being the site of the first ever
‘Tree Fest’. Field day participants sit among the now mature trees and shrubs planted
at Tree Fest to hear early findings of the LWW NT (2002-2006) project.
Source: Karen Forge-Zirkler, 2004.
Plate 3: Case study farm field days attracted in excess of 100 participants each. This
one, at ‘Lana’ attracted 170 participants from all over NSW to hear how Holistic
Management contributed to the spectacular biodiversity findings of the LWW NT
(2002-2006) project.
Source: Karen Forge-Zirkler, 2004.
The project produced high quality ecological and economic data that were analysed and
presented in a series of extension publications for southern New England woolgrowers and
the Australian wool industry. The publications included three Case Study Farm booklets, seven
Testimonial Farm brochures, 11 Fact Sheets and one calendar. These can be found at
www.snelandcare.org.au under the publications menu.
The extension materials produced by the project were of high quality. They were original, broad,
detailed, provided new insights and gave a positive image of the regional wool industry.
They now provide the industry with grower-oriented property management information,
scientifically researched answers to woolgrowers’ questions, information for wool promotion,
bargaining power with regulators, and scientific evidence with which to engage green groups
and urban critics.
Good communication adds value
As an added bonus, and largely because of the extension and communication approach taken by
the project as a whole, project leader, Associate Professor Nick Reid, stated that he enjoyed
working with an extended group of 25 woolgrower families and consultants. He worked with
them while attending Steering Committee meetings, gathering the experiences and insights of
the Case Study and Testimonial growers, helping technical staff work on the Monitor farms with
the pasture surveys, and working with CARE and the Project Facilitator on the results and
extension products.
74
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
Incentives for adoption
Following completion of the Land, Water & Wool Northern Tablelands Project (2002-2006),
Southern New England Landcare secured a $669,529 grant from the National Landcare Program
through the Northern Rivers and Border Rivers-Gwydir Catchment Management Authorities
(CMA). Additional funds were secured from the Namoi CMA, Northern Rivers CMA Plan
Implementation and River Health programs, and the Macleay National Landcare Program
project.
The funding was made available to landholders under a project called the Land, Water and Wool
Best Management Practice project (LWW2-BMP) to assist them implement findings from Land,
Water & Wool Northern Tablelands Project (2002-2006).
All of the funding secured for on-ground works was rolled out simultaneously. This ensured that
landholders had a ‘one-stop-shop’ for all their project requirements and were involved in a
consistent project planning and assessment framework, facilitated by Southern New England
Landcare staff assisted by various technical personnel.
A steering committee of local landholders and technical personnel was formed to ensure LWW2BMP was delivered in a way that would achieve the best outcomes for both landholders and the
funding bodies.
Eight field days and 10 follow-up workshops were run throughout the region. These activities
utilised the extension products produced in the 2002-2006 project and the assistance of local
‘Landcare Champions’. During the field days and workshops, farmers were provided with
examples of BMPs in the field and then assisted by a group of technical experts and local
‘Landcare Champions’ to use the extension products to plan on-ground works that would
implement BMPs. Proposals were then assessed by a local panel and funding was allocated
according to specified criteria.
In total, 170 people attended the field days. This led to 50 farmers attending the workshops and
submitting 90 project proposals. Funding allocations were made to 85 of these projects.
Landholders contributed approximately $670,000 in cash and kind to implement the projects.





Projects included:
Constructing subdivision fencing and off-stream watering for improved grazing
management, native vegetation regeneration and/or the protection of riparian
zones/wetlands.
Establishing strategic belts and blocks of woody vegetation for multiple outcomes, e.g.
corridor linkages, stock shelter.
Fencing off bushland remnants for conservation and/or regeneration.
Fencing off and managing eroded areas or saline scalds.
The biophysical outcomes of the project included:





36 km of stream bank and 263 ha of riparian vegetation protected with 45 km of fencing.
Off-stream watering systems established on 15 properties.
1,041 ha of remnant vegetation protected.
97 ha of vegetation established.
197 km of fencing erected to protect these works.
Conclusion
This innovative, whole-of-community approach enabled a significant step in a positive direction
for our nation’s ability to conserve nature and biodiversity across whole landscapes.
The first project (2002-2006) provided:



The science and economics behind what so many of our leading landholders were claiming
was occurring on their farms, incentive and motivation for others to do the same, and an
opportunity for landholders to access financial incentives to assist with a wide range of
NRM practices.
The outcomes of this science are applicable not only on the Northern Tablelands, but
nationally.
This approach also demonstrated how effective a research project can be when the
extension is designed and built into the project from the beginning. A communication and
extension strategy designed by a team of local wool growers who were empowered
through group facilitation was key to the success of the project.
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
75
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
The follow-on ‘best management practice’ implementation project demonstrated that significant
numbers of landholders are willing and able to learn about and make changes on farm that
affect biodiversity in a positive way.
Key to the great outcomes we experienced with the Land, Water & Wool projects are the
following points, of which none should be underestimated:



A dedicated Project Facilitator to facilitate landholders and technical experts to work
together in a way that values local knowledge in all stages of the project.
Underpinning project activities with sound science and dedicated technical experts at all
times.
The power of enabling a local steering committee of woolgrowers to design and advise the
project.
As a result of our learnings with the Land, Water & Wool projects, and in the spirit of action
research and action learning, Southern New England Landcare now runs most of its projects
using the ‘Land, Water & Wool Project’ approach.
Acknowledgements
Funding was provided by Australian Wool Innovation and Land & Water Australia for the project
entitled Project UNE 43: Profitable Biodiverse Wool Production Systems for the Northern
Tablelands of NSW.
Acknowledgement is made to the key stakeholders in this project:





Ecosystem Management, University of New England - Principal Investigator: Associate
Professor Nick Reid, supported by Biodiversity Technician: Stuart Green and Biodiversity
and GIS Technician: Cate MacGregor
Centre for Agricultural and Regional Economics, Armidale - Economists: David Thompson
an Roy Powell
Institute for Rural Futures, University of New England - Sociologist: Dr Ian Reeve
Land and Water Australia (LWA), who were commissioned by AWI to manage Land, Water
& Wool nationally
Southern New England Landcare Ltd, Armidale - Facilitator, Grower Liaison, Steering
Committee Organization, Desktop Publication Design: Kàren Forge-Zirkler.
References
ABC Landline, 2007. ‘Wool industry spreading tree message’ Reporter: Pip Courtney First Published:
23/09/2007. http://www.abc.net.au/landline/content/2006/s2037354.htm
Reeve, I, Bock, K, Thompson, J, van der Meulen, A & Coleman, M, 2006. Increasing Wool Profits by Working
with the Environment, 1st and 2nd Survey Results, Institute for Rural Futures, University of New
England, Armidale, NSW.
76
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
A three-legged approach towards improved development and
adoption of best-bet practices for managing grazing lands across
northern Australia
Jane Hamilton1, Michael Quirk2, Rodd Dyer3, Joe Scanlan1, Timothy Emery1 and David
Phelps1
1
Agri-Science Queensland, Department of Employment, Economic Development and Innovation, Raglan St,
Roma, QLD 4455.
2
Mick Quirk Consulting, Northgate Rd, Northgate QLD, 4013
3
formerly Meat and Livestock Australia, Gregory Terrace, Fortitude Valley QLD 4006.
Email: [email protected]
Key Words: Grazing land management, extension approach, Bio-economic modelling,
research synthesis
Introduction
The northern beef industry (north of 26ºS) accounts for over half of the national beef herd and
represents an area of approximately three million square kilometres of grazing lands across
Queensland, Northern Territory and the Kimberley and Pilbara regions of Western Australia. For
beef producers in this northern industry, a major challenge is to boost productivity and profit
while maintaining or improving the natural resource base that underpins their enterprises - their
grazing land. Meat and Livestock Australia identified four grazing land management issues that
required further investigation: paddock development (fences and water), managing stocking
rate, pasture spelling and prescribed burning. While grazing land management strategies are
generally well understood, the costs, benefits and practicalities of these strategies at a property
level are often uncertain. This uncertainty is one of the reasons constraining higher levels of
adoption of these best-bet strategies.
The three-legged approach
The Northern Grazing Systems (NGS) project evolved from identification of the need for
stakeholders in grazing land management Research, Development and Extension (RD&E) to
evaluate the evidence base for what was perceived to be best-bet management strategies and
to more fully explore the likely benefits and costs of implementing these (Phase I).
Furthermore, there was an opportunity in this project to systematically identify, prioritise and
address research gaps for future RD&E (Phase II). Six target regions were identified for the
initial NGS project: Victoria River District; Burdekin woodlands; Fitzroy woodlands; Mitchell
grasslands–western Queensland; Mitchell grasslands–Barkly Tablelands; and Maranoa-Balonne
woodlands. Three teams were brought together and worked concurrently in Phase I of the twophase NGS project; the synthesis team, bio-economic modelling (BEM) team and regional
assessment team (one regional team for each six region represented).
Synthesis team
Within Phase I, the synthesis team reviewed, analysed and integrated data and outputs from
past field research studies and regional workshops across northern Australia, generating a suite
of best-bet guidelines and strategies. The team produced the report “Grazing management
guidelines for northern Australia: Scientific rationale and justification” (McIvor 2010) which
addressed each of the four management issues and formed the basis for guidelines tailored to
each of the six regions. For each management factor, information was detailed about common
regional issues, signs, causes, management responses, evidence, implementation and caveats
to the information. The report concluded with recommendations for future extension and
research activities.
Bio-Economic Modelling team
The Bio-Economic Modelling (BEM) team modified, linked and applied existing simulation models
to evaluate best-bet guidelines in terms of their impacts on productive capacity, risk and
economic performance. The GRASP pasture model has been used to explore a wide range of
issues, from assessing safe carrying capacities for properties (Johnston et al. 1996) to
examining effects of climate change in extensive grazing lands (McKeon et al. 2008). GRASP
was modified to investigate three key practices – stocking rate strategies, spelling and use of
fire (see Scanlan et al. 2011 for details). The regional assessment team (below) developed a
representative beef breeding enterprise consisting of a number of paddocks and an animal
production system (e.g. selling all weaners or selling bullocks) as a base for the BEM team to
evaluate management strategies. A variant of the ENTERPRISE herd economic model (MacLeod
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
77
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
and Ash 2001) was calibrated to represent the production systems developed at each regional
workshop. This simulated property-level animal numbers and turnoff rates over the last 30
years and estimated gross margins, net profit and year-to-year variability using GRASP to
simulate stocking rates and animal productivity.
Regional assessment team
The role of the regional assessment team was to link the synthesis and BEM teams and to adapt
the information generated by those teams for specific end-user groups. The regional
assessment team comprised of local extension officers, advisors and beef producers. Onproperty development and demonstration work allowed further evaluation of strategies,
improved relevance of practices and confidence in estimates of their costs and benefits, and
extension of findings to the broader industry.
Together with outputs from BEM and discussion and input from regional specialists and
producers, the synthesis of past results underpinned best practice guidelines for each region –
these provided a strong foundation for future extension programs. From these documents, other
materials will be produced for specific audiences e.g. extension staff, producers, and other
groups or individuals that directly or indirectly influence on-property grazing land management.
Also identified were the specific knowledge and information gaps that limit the reliability,
relevance and uptake of recommended practices and therefore priorities for future R, D & E.
A regional case study – Maranoa Balonne
For the Maranoa Balonne (MB) region, in southern Queensland, an initial workshop was held
with graziers whose properties represented a good geographic spread across the MB region;
agency staff not directly engaged in the project; and project staff. The aim was to record
current grazing land management practices and define a representative property on which to
test the bio-economic model.
The process involved several steps: getting participants to group the land types of the MB into
broader management groups requiring similar management; documenting common practices
(i.e. those perceived to be used by 70% or more of graziers in the region); documenting best
practices and untested practices that might have merit as future management options;
developing the size, infrastructure, herd structure and enterprises for the representative
property on which the practices could be ‘tested’ with BEM; identifying research gaps and
documenting regional demonstrations and unpublished information were further facilitated
processes in the workshop.
The information gathered from this workshop was used to inform the synthesis document and
the BEM modelling. The BEM and synthesis results were then reported back to the regional
group in a second workshop for further evaluation and refinement. The major regional output
from Phase I in the MB was a regional technical guide for grazing advisors and researchers
(Paton et al. 2011). The target audience was technical people in the region including extension
officers, NRM and Landcare staff, rural bank managers, agri-business staff, consultants and
other advisory people who interact regularly with producers in the MB. The publication is now
the repository of useful MB grazing management information and a legacy of the project to the
region. The publication will be revised and updated as new information becomes available,
especially from the Phase II regional activities and BEM information.
For the MB, Phase I project activities highlighted the need for increased focus on managing
stocking rates for improved land condition. The Pannell et al. (2006) approach was used to
further identify the best-bet management practices that had the highest ‘relative advantage’
and were readily ‘trialable’. This assisted the regional project team to define development and
extension activities for Phase II that were targeted towards higher adoption amongst MB
graziers. Phase II has the broad ‘campaign’ of “Managing stocking rates to achieve better
outcomes for pastures and profits”.
Many producers in the MB have a business focus on the number of head or the quantity of beef
that needs to be turned off to meet their financial goals and personal success measures.
Stocking rate and long-term carrying capacities appear to be key management figures that most
producers may know but they don’t necessarily relate to their turn off goals, land condition and
opportunities for spelling and burning.
The graziers and agency advisor group that provided information for Phase I suggested
conservative stocking rates plus or minus 10-25% change in annual stock numbers, depending
on season, was common practice in the region. BEM analyses suggested the best outcomes for
pastures and profits were from stocking around long-term carrying capacity with annual
increases in stock numbers ≤ 10% in a good season and annual reductions ≤ 40% in poor
78
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
seasons. The base level stocking rates suggested by producers were notable different from
those of local research results and modelling activities. These differences were least for cleared
pastures in good condition but were very large for pastures with inherently low carrying capacity
that were in poor condition and with high tree densities. Possible reasons for these differences
were discussed but require additional investigation.
These findings highlighted an important issue: Are science-based stocking rate
recommendations accurate for the MB? Are producers adjusting their stocking rates to account
for land condition and tree densities? Safe utilisation rates for the region’s land types are based
on small data sets and have not been thoroughly validated against all available research data or
long-term producer experience. Additional BEM, in combination with long-term property data,
would likely lead to better-informed extension activities around stocking rate management,
particularly in relation to the impact of land types and different tree densities.
In Phase II of this work, the potential impacts of climate change on stocking rates were also
being examined. A key question was: With a variable and changing climate, what will motivate
producers in the MB to understand measure and alter their stocking rates based on land
condition, variation in pasture growth, and the business driver of optimising kilograms of beef
turned-off?
To answer these questions and to address the Phase II campaign, a group of Focus Farms were
formed, representing a geographical spread across the region. The Focus Farms methodology
was adapted from the O’Kane and Nettle (2009) Partner Farm philosophy. The Focus Farms’
role, in conjunction with the project team, was to gather evidence and document stocking rates,
kilograms of beef turned off and reasons for stocking rate management decisions used by
industry. Animal live-weight gain data and paddock information (tree basal area, land type, land
condition) has been collected in Phase II to address research gaps on animal production,
utilisation rates and industry accepted stocking rates.
Benefits of the three-legged approach
The experience and knowledge of producers and extension staff, the key messages from field
research, and the insights from simulation modelling have each been used to improve onproperty decision making in grazing enterprises. This project appears to be one of the few times
that these three approaches have been integrated to evaluate the evidence base for key grazing
practices and underpin and guide subsequent R,D&E. The extent to which this has been
successful, in terms of immediate improvements in the R, D&E and associated benefits for
producers, is still to be fully evaluated. While the approach raised some new uncertainties,
several aspects of the process worked well in most regions including:
The three project activities were done in parallel, rather than in sequence or in isolation,
thereby ensuring ‘real time’ collaboration and integration. This also helped with completing the
project (Phase 1) and achieving significant progress in a timely fashion;


The combination of approaches was useful and challenging to all involved, including
producers, although the extent to which extension staff, field researchers and modellers
were able to combine effectively did vary across regions, and was affected by the
workload (especially for the BEM team);
The integration of activities in Phase I provided a strong foundation for an on-going
integrated approach as Phase II research and extension activities develop;
The inclusion of a plan to take the work from this project into another phase, and the
subsequent funding of that plan, provided the necessary continuity to build on Phase I and work
towards significant benefits for beef cattle producers in each target region.
Among the many findings from the project, three key learnings stood out:



There were some marked differences between what producers said to be current practice
and what BEM indicated to be the best-performing management practices – this provides
a useful tension and a focus for ongoing work in Phase II;
Current models are not sufficiently flexible to examine some of the practices that land
managers either practice or would like to evaluate, and other ways of exploring these
options may be required.
The evidence base for practices such as stocking rate management, pasture spelling and
prescribed fire was less than expected and made reliable estimates of costs and benefits
difficult. This has reduced confidence in some recommendations – while this will be
addressed by further R, D & E it does reduce the immediate value of the project to beef
producers (in terms of practices that have definitive benefits and costs). In other words,
such an approach challenges assumptions and perceptions about best practice and may
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
79
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
therefore be seen by some as too laborious and/or difficult compared to more general,
and perhaps less rigorous, management guidelines.
References
Johnston PW, McKeon GM and Day KA (1996). Objective ‘safe’ carrying capacities fir south-west QLD
Australia: development of a model for individual properties. Rangelands Journal 18: 244-58.
O’Kane M and Nettle R (2009). Partner Farms in multidisciplinary research: The continuing evolution of a
research and development methodology. Extension Farming Systems Journal 5 (2), 19-28.
Pannell DJ, Marshell, GR, Barr N, Curtis A, Vanclay F and Wilkinson R (2006). Understanding and promoting
adoption of conservation practices by rural landholders. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture
46, 1407-1424.
Paton, C., Hamilton, J. and Emery, T. (2011). ‘Best-bet practices for managing the grazing lands of the
Maranoa Balonne. A technical guide of options for optimising animal production, profitability and land
condition’. Queensland Department of Employment, Economic Development and Innovation, Brisbane.
MacLeod N, Ash A (2001). Development of a spreadsheet herd dynamics model to assess the economic
value of forecasts in extensive grazing enterprises. Oceans to Farms Project Report, CSIRO.
McKeon GM, Stone GS, Syktus JI, Carter JO, Flood NR, Ahrens DG, Bruget DN, Chilcott CR, Cobon DH,
Cowley RA, Crimp SJ, Fraser GW, Howden SM, Johnston PW, Ryan JG, Stokes CJ and Day KA (2009).
Climate change impacts on northern Australian rangeland livestock carrying capacity: a review of issues.
Rangeland Journal 31, 1-29.
McIvor JG (2010) Enhancing adoption of improved grazing and fire management practices in Northern
Australia: Synthesis of research and identification of best bet management guidelines. Final Report MLA
B.NBP.0579 Meat and Livestock Australia, North Sydney, NSW 2059.
Scanlan J, MacLeod N, Pahl L, Whish G, Cowley R and McIvor J (2011). Grazing management options for
improving profitability and sustainability 2. Modelling to predict biological and financial outcomes. In
Proceedings of the Northern Beef Research Update Conference, Darwin 2-4 August 2011, pp. 47-52.
North Australia Beef Research Council, Park Ridge, Queensland.
80
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
A systematic approach to improving whole farm planning project
delivery
Carl Sudholz1, Don Shaw2, Sarah Wallis3 and Jenny Wilson4
1
2
Victorian Department of Primary Industries, 110 Natimuk Road, Horsham, VIC, 3400
Victorian Department of Primary Industries, McMillian Avenue, Swifts Creek, VIC, 3896
3
Victorian Department of Primary Industries, 89 Sydney Road, Benalla, VIC, 3672
4
Victorian Department of Primary Industries, 255 Ferguson Road, Tatura, VIC, 3616
Email: [email protected]
Keywords: Whole Farm Planning, Continuous Improvement, Extension, Decision Support
Introduction
The Enabling Decision Support (EDS) Methodology was developed by the Victorian DPI to guide
the improvement of the FarmPlan21 whole farm planning service during 2009 to 2011. The EDS
Methodology is a continuous improvement process specifically applied to capability and capacity
development of whole farm planning services.
The FarmPlan21 service began as a pilot farm planning service in the North Central and
Wimmera regions of Victoria in September 2008. During 2010 the service was expanded across
new catchment management authority areas and enhanced by integration with the Victorian
DPI’s livestock extension services. This state-wide expansion required building the capacity and
capability in the FarmPlan21 service (Wilson 2010a). The improvement methodology and
preliminary results of the pilot are presented in this paper.
Methodology
The EDS methodology begins by identifying two separate, but associated projects: the Service
Delivery Project and the Service Improvement Project. The Service Delivery Project is
responsible for the delivery of FarmPlan21 and the Service Improvement Project is responsible
for process improvement and capability development.
The EDS Methodology is a continuous improvement process designed to maximise impact of the
development and improvement of a service. There are six defined stages that provide a
complete process of the service improvement. These stages are described in Table 1, below.
Table 1: Descriptions of the EDS Project Stages
Stage
Purpose
Select
Select the farm planning service that will be improved. This is the Service
Delivery Project. Identification will often begin with an environmental scan of
services and client needs. A project scope is developed describing the
improvement projects stakeholders, resources and outcomes.
Identify, create or select the Service Improvement Project. This will often
occur through the allocation of resources of the Service-Delivery Project to
service improvement. In such cases, the Service-Improvement Project
becomes a sub-project of the Service-Delivery Project.
Scope
Analyse
Detailed analysis of the selected service. The Analyse stage has two phases.
First is to investigate the project stakeholders, processes and governance and
set benchmark standards for service delivery. The second is to use evaluation
to benchmark the service, prioritise focus and then develop an Action Plan for
improvement activity.
Plan
Enhance
Conduct the design, development and delivery of improvement processes and
activities as guided by the Analyse Action Plan. This may include staff
training, product development and system improvement.
Do
Evaluate
Evaluation of the improved service against the same benchmark standards
determined in the Analyse stage.
Check
Consolidate
Purposeful review and reflection of the improvement process. Compare
benchmarked change. Recommend further improvement activity. Review of
the effectiveness of benchmarks. Learning’s, case studies and acquired
knowledge is documented.
Review
Exit
The finishing process. Ensure a clean and complete exit by the improvementproject team. Includes the handing over of all responsibility of delivery to the
service-project.
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
Continuous
Improvement
Exit
81
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
The stages outlined in Table 1 above are displayed diagrammatically in Figure 2, below.
Figure 2: The EDS project methodology
Table 2 provides a summary of activities and outputs of the work conducted by the Service
Improvement Project during 2009 to 2011.
Table 2: FarmPlan21 enabling activities timeline by EDS Methodology stage
Stage
Timeline
Activity
Select
Sep 2009
Project meetings
Project Planning activities
Analyse
Oct 2009 to
Jan 2010
Capability assessment
Documentation review
Stakeholder Workshops
Staff phone and group
interviews
Enhance
Jan 2010 to
Jun 2011
Staff Training
Project manuals
Client Management
Database development
GIS Imagery Coordination
Promotional resource
development
Evaluate
Aug 2011
In progress (at time of
writing)
Consolidate
Dec 2011
In progress (at time of
writing)
Source: Wilson 2010a; Wilson, Shaw & Robertson 2010; Shaw & Wilson 2011
82
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
From January 2010 through to June 2011 a range of improvement activities were conducted to
build capability and capacity of the FarmPlan21 project as to enable the expansion of the whole
farm planning service (Wilson, Shaw & Robertson 2010; Shaw & Wilson 2011).
As at the time of writing, activities of the EVALUATE and CONSOLIDATE stages were in
progress. Indicative results from these final stages are provided below.
Results
The results of the FarmPlan21 improvement are described specific to the stages of the EDS
Methodology.
Improvement Benchmarks
The SELECT and ANALYSE stages where used to identify, prioritise and benchmark, focus areas
for service improvement. Table 3 provides a summary of this investigation as conducted with
the FarmPlan21 service.
Table 3: FarmPlan21 investigation activities by EDS Methodology Stage
SELECT1






Consolidate service capacity needs
Evaluate options for geographic
expansion
Facilitate the development and
consolidation of farm planning content
and modules
Develop and grow functional components
Department farm planning service
delivery
Build staff capability to deliver to a
consistent standard
Provide technology capacity and
capability to service delivery
ANALYSE2 (Benchmarks)













Consistent service delivery model is
adopted
Maintain regional relevance
Service meets investor needs
Service is targeted, relevant and effective
for the client
Client database is used for client profiling
and client data capture
Client information is aligned to client
segments
Client focused marketing and
communications
Core components (as defined in the
FarmPlan21 manual) are delivered to the
accredited standard
Service is properly resourced
Service uses spatial mapping technology
Collaboration with industry providers
Service maintains flexible delivery
Quality assurance process are adhered to
1. (Wilson 2010b) Section 1.5 – Objectives
2. (Wilson 2010b) Section 2.1 – Requirements for FP21 expansion
Improvement Activities
Table 4, provides a summary of the specific actions to be taken, what was done and the
indicative results collected thus far.
Discussion
Service delivery and Service improvement are different functions
The EDS Methodology recognises that service-delivery and service-improvement are two very
different functions in the project management life cycle. For this pilot the Service Improvement
Project assumed responsibility for developing new business processes and promotional material.
This enabled the service delivery staff to focus on delivery. Therefore, the improvement process
did not limit the effectiveness of the service delivery staff or their outputs.
Targeting the effort
The work resulted in the FarmPlan21 project doubling its outputs within 12 months. This is a
strong indication that the improvement work guided by the EDS Methodology was effective in
increasing the capability and capacity of FarmPlan21 service.
Evidence of the improvement effect is to be collected during the EVALUATE stage activities
planned for August and September 2011. This information will measure the impact of the
improvement activities. It is intended that this evidence will provide with confidence a measured
impact of the value gained from the improvement work.
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
83
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
Table 4: FarmPlan21 enabling activities by EDS Methodology Stage
Area1
Staff
Capability
ANALYSE2 (Priority)








Business
Capability




Products &
Information
Resources






Tools &
Technology


1.
2.
3.
4.
84
Group facilitation
skills
Resources registry
Enable skills access
and sharing
Facilitator position
descriptions
Computer literacy
Assessment
processes
Outcomes evaluation
Reporting standards
Investment is the key
driver of change
Streamlining benefits
require verification
Demonstrate benefits
of cross portfolio
collaboration
Consideration of core
enabling
requirements beyond
scope of operational
staff is required
Communication needs
adequate resources
Resources needs to
be centrally
coordinated and
regularly peer
reviewed
New modules
required based on
client feedback
Cost recovery
practices need to be
consistently applied
Consistent
communication
targeted to segment,
sector and cross
sector needs
Communication must
consistently recognise
all contributing
agencies
A common database
for the service is
required.
GIS support needs to
be resourced to
provide the mapping
demands of the
service
Pilot Expansion of FP21
Pilot Expansion of FP21
FP21 Evaluation Report
FP21 Evaluation Report
ENHANCE3
Staff Training

Whole farm planning
delivery

Conducting follow-up

Client Management
database training

GIS training
Promotional

Internal promotion of
FarmPlan21 services

FarmPlan21 road shows
Business Processes

Established Farm Planning
Community of Practice
Business Processes

Integrated service delivery
model designed and tested

Project sub-committee
formed to develop project
model and capability
requirements
Business Processes

Established follow-up and
review processes

Facilitator’s internal
collaboration space using
Quickr collaboration
software.

Guidelines for targeting
client sector and segment
specific marketing material
Information Resources

FarmPlan21 training manual

Module development kit

New modules on Water;
Climate Change; Pest Plant
and Animals; Fire Risk
Management; Soils

New short courses
Promotional

Fact sheets and updates

Industry specific posters

Website re-development.

FarmPlan21 logo
Business Processes

Developed FarmPlan21
Client Management
Database

Established state-wide
computer bank

GIS Imagery coordination

Established GIS specialists
team

Introduced GIS standards
EVALUATE-Success
measures4













VIC DPI service
providers are more
confident in delivery
Increased level of
participant satisfaction
Increased awareness of
FarmPlan21 within VIC
DPI
More competent
program data collection
and interpretations
Increased confidence in
using GIS tools in
workshops.
Improved consistency of
resources
Improved quality of
services
Services more client
focused
Greater variety of
services available
Greater implementation
support
Increased effectiveness
of client feedback
Improved client
segmentation
Improved utilisation of
GIS technology
Report (Wilson 2010b) - headings from Section 6.4
Report (Wilson 2010b) - Modified Bullet points from Section 6.4
(Shaw & Wilson 2011) Table 7&8 - Actions
(Shaw & Wilson 2011) Table 7&8 - Results
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
The EDS Methodology leads to targeting improvement activities into three categories: Staff
training, promotional materials, business processes and information resources. This approach
provided consistency and continuity across the range of the service delivery areas. This ensured
that the stakeholder interviews and staff feedback was used to design and implement improved
processes, resources and training. This is expected to lead directly to an improved service
delivery that better meets the needs of all stakeholders involved.
In 2010, this work enabled the FarmPlan21 project to deliver new Farm Planning Services to
400 farmers in six new catchment regions (Shaw & Wilson 2011).
Improvement takes resources and time
The improvement of the FarmPlan21 service would not have occurred with out the dedicated
resources of the Service Improvement Project. This work provides some evidence towards
validating how dedicated resources to service improvement can enhance service efficiency and
impact.
Effective improvement takes time. Activities such as staff training and business process
development require considerable effort before their impact on service delivery is realised.
Consistency in evaluation is vital if impact is to be measured
There must be at least some consistency regarding the benchmarks used in the evaluation
activities of the ANALYSE and EVALUATE stages. In this pilot, consistent measures were not
used by the two evaluations and therefore the results can not be directly compared. In this trial,
impact of the improvement activities can not be empirically measured. This is an area of focus
for future applications of the EDS Methodology.
There is more to this than farm planning
The authors see no reason as to why this approach could not apply to the improvement of any
decision support service. In theory, the EDS methodology should be able to coordinate a wide
range of evaluation methods, against any determined benchmarks for service delivery.
Conclusion
This trial of the EDS Methodology has demonstrated that the Victorian DPI whole farm planning
services can be improved through a systematic approach. The approach described here has
been successful in targeting the improvement and expansion of the FarmPlan21 service in
Victoria.
Further work is now needed to test the methodology in full application with a range of Decision
Support services beyond whole farm planning.
References
IAP2 2004, “IAP2 Public Participation Spectrum.” Retrieved August 1, 2011, from http://www.iap2.org.au/
Shaw, D & Wilson, J 2011, FarmPlan21 Evaluation Report, Department of Primary Industries, Melbourne.
Wilson, J 2010a, Enabling Strategies Project Management Plan, Department of Primary Industries,
Melbourne.
Wilson, J 2010b, Pilot Expansion of FarmPlan21: Incorporation of livestock systems, building capability &
state-wide expansion. Final Project Report 2009-2010, Department of Primary Industries, Melbourne.
Wilson, J, Shaw, D & Robertson, C 2010, FarmPlan21 Achievements Summary, Department of Primary
Industries, Melbourne.
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
85
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
IPM workshops for growers and consultants – lessons for R, D
and E
Kate Charleston1, Melina Miles1 and Hugh Brier2
1.
Department of Employment, Economic Development and Innovation (DEEDI), PO Box 102, Toowoomba
Qld 4350.
2.
Department of Employment, Economic Development and Innovation (DEEDI), PO Box 23, Kingaroy, 4610.
Email: [email protected]
Introduction
Facilitating change in pest management practices, and ultimately the implementation of IPM
(integrated pest management) is a significant challenge for research and extension
practitioners. The field crops entomology group within the Queensland Department of
Employment and Economic Development (DEEDI, formerly Department of Primary Industries)
has a long history of researchers and extension officers working together, with industry, to
promote the adoption of IPM (Brier et al. 2008) However, there has been limited formal
evaluation of the extent to which these activities have resulted in sustained and/or progressive
practice change in the grains industry. Over the past 10 years, there has been a concerted
effort to promote IPM for pulses in the northern region. Over this period, 14 soybean and
mungbean IPM workshops have been held in Queensland and northern NSW for around 400
growers and their advisors. In addition, pest management modules have been delivered to over
350 participants as part of 19 accredited mungbean, ten chickpea and four sunflower
workshops. With this recent experience, it is a good time to reflect on what we are doing, how it
is being done, the impact that it is having and how we may improve the adoption of IPM.
Workshops as a way of communicating about IPM
At the outset in 2002, accredited agronomist training courses were developed in consultation
with the mungbean industry to meet industry demand for improved capability to implement IPM
amongst agronomists and growers. Initially, the focus, was on consultants, with the expectation
that they would expose growers to IPM best- practice in mungbeans in their role as advisers. In
2006, IPM courses were developed for cane growers wanting to grow soybeans (and other
pulses) as ‘grain for harvest’ rotation crops in cane-farming systems in coastal Queensland. The
structure and content of these courses was modelled on that of previous courses.
From our perspective, the benefits of the workshop format are that they:






Allow for face-to-face contact between DEEDI staff and participants; important in
establishing credibility and trust, a point also emphasised by course participants.
Bring participants together, providing opportunities to learn together and benefit from
discussion and sharing of personal experiences.
Provide invaluable opportunity for the researchers and extension staff to get feedback on
the material they are presenting to industry, and the practicalities of implementing it onfarm.
Are a cost-effective way to make contact with a large group of growers and/or advisers.
Sow the seeds for the emergence of local IPM champions.
Establish IPM networks throughout NE Australia grain/pulse growing regions.
However, experience in delivering the workshops demonstrated that some aspects of the
workshop model are less than ideal. These include:




A tendency to overload participants with information. The focus on the delivery of
research outcomes (thresholds, monitoring, identification, biology, ecology) results in a
very top-down, transfer of technology model of engagement with the participants.
A need for post-workshop follow-up to provide ongoing support for participants as they
attempt to change their pest management practices.
Limited assessment of the needs and expectations of the participants prior to the
workshop; resulting in the same workshop being delivered irrespective of participant
experience, skills or knowledge.
Limited evaluation of short and long-term impact of participation on growers and
agronomists.
Workshop content and processes
The content of the IPM module of the Accredited Mungbean Agronomist Course was developed
following discussions (early 2000s) with the Australian Mungbean Association (AMA) and Pulse
Australia. These stakeholders noted concerns that most consultants were poorly skilled in
86
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
mungbean pest management. As a result of these discussions, and subsequent experience with
early workshops, the courses now cover crop stages at greatest risk, insect identification (pests
and beneficials), monitoring, thresholds, control options, IPM principles, and insect biology. The
soybean/summer pulse IPM courses follow a similar format, but with an emphasis on pest
management in soybeans.
Key tactics promoted during the workshops include: (a) the “Go Soft Early” IPM approach to
delay broad-spectrum pesticide sprays for as long as possible to foster beneficial insects, (b)
thorough scouting at critical crop stages, (c) the adherence to pest thresholds, and (d) the use
of the most selective pesticide options wherever possible. Since their inception, workshop
content has been added to or modified as research has progressed and new pest issues have
arisen.
The workshops are comprised of two components, a sit-down lecture and a field-based practical
component. The pest management component of the Accredited Mungbean Agronomist Course
consists of a 3.5 hour lecture and is normally held in winter/spring with a follow up field
component in the following summer when crops are available. The soybean IPM workshop
lectures are normally held in summer, and consist of a 4-5 hour lecture followed by a field
component on the same day or the following morning.
Participants are encouraged to put the information they have covered in the lectures to the test
in the field sessions. The practical sessions include active learning and focus on sampling and
monitoring, insect identification and decision making for the crop in question – similar to what
would occur on their own farms. Adult learning principles are central to the structure of the
workshops which incorporate opportunities for interaction and discussion, with a focus on
learning from peers, and building on experience (Lawrence et al. 2000).
Workshop tools
Since 2008 a TurningPoint® Audience Response System (Keepad Interactive, Sydney) has been
employed to assist in quantifying audience knowledge and feedback. TurningPoint® software
allows presenters to ask questions of the audience, and the audience to respond anonymously
(or otherwise) to a choice of options using keypads. The responses are captured, summarised
and immediately presented back on-screen to the audience for debate and discussion.
TurningPoint® allows data to be analysed in terms of a range of demographic criteria, e.g.
region, industry, experience, profession, previous workshop participation.
This technology provides information to researchers and extension officers delivering the
workshops on the participants in terms of:





Levels of knowledge and confidence in specific areas e.g. pest identification (pre and post
workshop)
Current pest management practices
Expectations of the workshop
Issues of particular importance to individuals, or regions, and
Documenting the incidence of regional pests across seasons
Participants using the technology have shown interest in seeing this data displayed and
visualising their position in the spread of responses.
Review of IPM courses – analysis of participant data
Analysis of data captured via TurningPoint® provides researchers and extension staff with
information on participants’ knowledge of pests and natural enemies, local issues, problems and
practices as well as information gaps. This data can then be used to improve course content and
address those issues identified in specific regions.
Recognition of pest and beneficial species
Survey data from the IPM courses clearly shows that the majority of course participants have
difficulty in identifying many of the insects commonly found in summer pulses, both pests and
natural enemies. Surveys in the initial courses showed that 75% of consultants couldn’t
recognize 50% of key insects commonly found in mungbean crops (Figure 1).
Clearly an inability to correctly identify insects in crop is a major impediment to making
appropriate management decisions. For example, many course participants find it difficult to
distinguish caterpillars. This has implications for the correct use of heliothis NPV if loopers and
helicoverpa cannot be distinguished, as NPV is ineffective against loopers. There is also evidence
that minor pests and natural enemies are generally poorly recognised by course participants.
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
87
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
Figure 1. Percent recognition (% correct answers) of 28 insects commonly found in
mungbeans, from participitants of an Accredited Mungbean Agronomist Course at
Emerald, July 2002 (17 participants)
Mungbean Accreditation Course Emerald 2002
% recognition
BSB NYMPH
RBSB EGGS
OECHALIA NYMPH
MELANCANTHUS
BM NYMPH
CERMATULUS
HELI BIG LARVA
ADB
RIPTORTUS
LOOPER
OECHALIA
BROWN STINK BUG
CERMATULUS EGGS
VEG JASSID
DAMSEL BUG
DAMSEL BUG NYMPH
GM
BPB
GM NYMPH
R & B BEETLE
LADYBIRD LARVA
HELI MOTH
HELI small LARVA
0
GVB
20
MICROPOLITIS
40
BSB
60
GVB EGGS
0-10
10-20
20-30
30-40
40-50
50-60
60-70
70-80
80-90
90-100
80
SLWF
% recognition pre-course
100
Surveys in subsequent workshops over a period of 3 years show that consultant/grower ability
to identify key pests has improved but remains varied, dependent upon species. For example
ability to identify mirids improved, but for other key pests such as the bean bugs and young
soybean loopers identification is still problematic (Figure 2).
Figure 2. Changes in insect recognition skills (from 2002-2010) in consultants for
selected major pest, minor pest and beneficial species commonly found in summer
pulses
% correct answers
% Correct answers - Mungbean courses - Emerald CQ
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
77
Jul-02
Aug-10
36
15
18
32
21
13
0
brown mirid
nymph
large brown
beanbug
soybean
looper (dark
version)
smudge bug
nymph
Participant feedback on course impact and content
Significant change in the confidence of course participants in managing pests has been
reported, despite challenges with insect recognition skills. Prior to undertaking an IPM course
participants are asked how confident they feel (in managing pests), and again at the end of the
theory session. In all cases participants report an increase in their level of confidence in managing
insect pests after completing an IPM course.
Course participants are also asked to identify those areas in which they feel they need more
instruction. Participants consistently identified insect identification and decision making as the
areas needing most attention (Figure 3).
88
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
Figure 3. Key areas of knowledge where grower and agronomist participants in IPM
courses identified they needed more capability
Coastal Soybean IPM courses 2009 - Needing more attention
35
% responses
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Pest &
Monitoring
Beneficial ID
Making
decisions
Maryborough
Pesticide
selection
Bundy
Isis
Time of
spraying
Mackay1
Resistance
issues
IPM
principles
Mackay 2
Percent (%) frequency values are based on the number of responses within each location
Feedback from participants (Figure 4) suggests that the content of the courses is not focusing on
areas in which they are particularly interested. Practical tools for decision making (identification and
economic thresholds) are identified as important, but less so other components. This feedback
highlights the deficiency of a transfer of technology approach, where presenters focus on telling the
participants how to do things, and impart scientific information, but the participants do not yet have
the necessary level of understanding needed to adapt the information to their own context.
Review of IPM courses
A focus on adoption rather than simply providing information
Reflection on our experience with IPM courses has identified some key issues that warrant
modification and/or development to improve the outcomes, and ultimately IPM adoption.
When considering how IPM education is conducted elsewhere, the example of the Farmer Field
School (FFS) stands out. This farmer-focused approach aims to develop knowledge through
experimental action learning and group discovery. This method allows farmers an opportunity to
observe, trial and experiment, draw conclusions and make their own informed decisions
regarding sustainable pest control (Braun et al. 2006). The FFS approach, in contrast to the
transfer of technology approach, does not assume that simply sharing information will result in
practice change in the target audience. Researchers and growers need to work together to
develop effective approaches for field conditions (van Schouwbroeck 1999). Such an approach is
based on co-research by farmers and scientists rather than research by scientists followed by
extension of information to farmers.
We are not alone in sensing that the current approach can be improved. As an eminent
entomologist has identified “The degree of success in implementing any change in pest
management practice will depend on the extent to which stakeholders (research scientists,
extension officers, growers and other key players) interact and work together to effect the
change” (Zalucki 2009).
Engagement with the workshop participants
In the past our IPM workshops consisted of information that addressed needs of farmers as
perceived by researchers and industry representatives. A single workshop course was developed
to be delivered to farmers/advisers growing the crop of interest. The workshop content was
delivered without reference to current knowledge or experience of the participants.
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
89
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
Figure 4. Participant feedback on the relevance of course content to their individual
needs
Coastal Soybean IPM courses 2009 - Most relevant aspects?
60
% frequency
50
40
30
20
10
0
Insect
Identification
Economic
thresholds
Using
insecticides
Maryborough
Bundy
The IPM
Concept
Isis
Mackay1
Crop
Agronomy
Sampling
Mackay 2
Percent (%) response values are based on the number of responses within each location
Now workshop content and process is better targeted with more understanding of the issues of
importance, priorities, values, and aspirations of growers. While data remains an important part
of the course content, to demonstrate tangible benefits and build credibility of the research/ers,
the needs of the growers must be the focus of the interaction. Allowing time for participants to
share their experiences, develop their own insights and test the data is often overlooked in an
attempt to cover large volumes of information. Spending time covering information may not be
as valuable to participants as learning a process for decision making which can be applied to a
wide range pest management decisions. We also need to recognise that growers do not make
decisions purely on factual data but rather on how these facts will affect them (Lawrence et al
2000).
Enabling small, measurable changes
Complex technology is a major constraint to adoption (Vanclay 2004). At first simplifying IPM
might seem to be impossible given the inherent complexity that we perceive as researchers.
Surely a grower can’t make a sound decision without all the information that we have? To date,
we have considered it important to provide a smorgasbord of options, from which farmers and
advisers can select those which suited their individual situations. It is now evident that the
many farmers and advisers are not equipped to make decisions about which options they should
be choosing, and even less so how to combine them into an IPM strategy.
On reflection, pest management can quite readily be divided into manageable components. For
example, it is possible to focus on the stages of crop development, rather than simply on
taxonomic groupings of pests. Provision of resources that can be accessed post-workshop may
meet the needs of farmers who can delve into the resource when they need specific information.
We could design a series of more focussed courses that deal with smaller, manageable sections
(identification or sampling or applying economic thresholds) that build on the experience of the
participants. As the participants work through the series of courses, the researcher becomes
more of a resource and less of an authority.
Eliciting a commitment to change and providing ongoing support to do so
A simple commitment to do something will often suffice as the first step into changing attitude
and practice. A commitment could be to attend a field day, trial a less disruptive insecticide, or
leave an unsprayed strip in the paddock to monitor natural enemies. Lawrence et al. (2000), in
a series of nitrogen management workshops encouraged growers to apply the recommendations
they had developed, as part of the workshop process, once they returned to their farms.
It is critical, however, that growers are supported through this stage of early adoption.
Entomologists and extension staff must be available as an important resource with whom
growers can discuss, question and test their knowledge and understanding. In an environment
90
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
of limited human resources, there is a need to explore how we might use online tools to support
participants after workshops. Importantly, the face-to-face contact that the course offered is
fundamental to establishing the reputation of the researchers and extension staff, and a level of
trust and confidence in these people to provide ongoing support.
Other support methods could include demonstration sites (and integrating these with
workshops), field days and farm walks and follow–up workshops at the end of the cropping cycle
that allows for reflection, discussion and questioning of results. Another means of providing
support to growers and consultants is to work with local champions. This has been done
successfully in coastal Queensland where members of local industry took a leading role in
assisting with sampling, decision making and driving IPM adoption
Monitoring and evaluation
Gathering quantitative evidence of changes in participant attitudes and practices is not a routine
part of the workshop process, and should be. There would be significant benefits to the way
workshops are designed and run, if there was a planned program of monitoring and evaluating
during the workshops, and post-workshop, once farmers return to their farms. This is an area of
expertise that we are lacking, and could benefit from a structured monitoring and evaluation
framework to guide evaluation by non-experts.
Concluding remarks
In an environment of shrinking resources, contact with growers and their advisers (agronomists
and consultants) relies heavily on group processes, particularly workshops. IPM is perceived to
be a complex undertaking, and faces a number of adoption barriers. However, we suggest that
by rethinking the way we engage with farmers and agronomists, focussing more on their needs
and experience, and less on what we have to tell them, we may be able to get better outcomes
from workshops, and better equip them to implement IPM.
Acknowledgements
We acknowledge the influence of Bruce Howie (C-Qual Agritelligence Pty Ltd) through his
workshop “How to use persuasion skills to drive technology adoption” for prompting us to think
critically about what we were doing in our engagement with farmers and their advisers.
References
Bellati J, Henry K, Umina P, Charleston K, Mangano P, Brier H, Severtson D and McLennan A 2009, From
boring bug lectures to interactive invertebrate learning – Using audience participation software to
‘actively’ transform grains industry training. Extension Farming Systems Journal 5 (2).
Braun A, Jiggins J, Röling N, Van den Berg H and Snijders P 2006, A Global Survey and Review of Farmer
Field School Experiences. Final report prepared for the International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI)
Wageningen The Netherlands.
Brier H, McLennan A and Dougall A 2007, Local Champions and Collaboration - Critical for IPM Adoption - A
Research/ Extension Perspective of Soybean IPM at Bundaberg/Isis. Proceedings of the 14th Australian
Soybean Conference, Bundaberg, Queensland 2007.
Brier H, Murray DAH, Wilson LJ, Nicholas AH, Miles MM, Grundy PR and McLennan A.J 2008, An Overview of
IPM in north eastern Australian grain farming systems: Past, present and future prospects. Australian
Journal of Experimental Agriculture 48(12): 1574-1593.
Charleston K and Brier H 2010, Integrated Pest Management in soybeans and mungbeans. A Question of
Education. Summer Grains Conference, Gold Coast, Queensland.
Charleston K 2009, The use of Turning Point Technology at IPM courses in Queensland. Unpublished
Heisswolf S and Bilston L 2001, Development and implementation of Brassica IPM systems in the Lockyer
Valley, Queensland, Australia. Proceedings of the 4th International Workshop on the management of
diamondback moth and other crucifer pests. Nov 2001, Melbourne Australia
Horne J, Page J and Nicholson C.2008, When will integrated pest management strategies be adopted?
Example of the development and implementation of integrated pest management strategies in cropping
systems in Victoria. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture. 48: 1601-1607.
Lawrence DN, Cawley ST and PT Hayman 2000, Developing answers and learning in extension for dryland
nitrogen management. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture. 40: 527-539.
Marsh S and Pannell D J. 2000. Agricultural extension policy in Australia: the good, the bad and the
misguided. Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics. 44 (4): 605-627.
Murray D, Miles M and Ferguson J. 2000. Area wide management (AWM) of Heliothis, results of current
studies.
10th
Australian
cotton
conffernce,
Brisbane
2000.
http://www.cottoncrc.org.au/content/Industry/Publications/Conference_Proceedings
Van Schouwbroeck F. 1999. Learning to Fly: developing citrus IPM in Bhutan. PhD thesis. Wageningen.
200p.
Vanclay F. 2004. Social principles for agricultural extension to assist in the promotion of natural resource
management. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 44: 213-222.
Zalucki MP, Adamson D and Furlong M J 2009. The future of IPM: whither or wither? Australian Journal of
Entomology (2009) 48, 85–96.
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
91
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
Innovative Service Delivery – A case study of new directions for
the Victorian DPI
Jana Sardelic1, Brigette Keeble2, Alison Medhurst3, Geoff Kaine4, Emily Tee5
1
Department of Primary Industries, Spring Street, Melbourne VIC 3001
2
Consulting Researcher to the Department of Primary Industries
3
Department of Primary Industries, 621 Burwood Highway, Knoxfield VIC 3180
4
Department of Primary Industries, Ferguson Road, Tatura, VIC 3616
5
Department of Primary Industries, 32 Lincoln Square North Carlton VIC 3053
Email [email protected]
Keywords: wholesaling, partnerships, collaboration, management, service model
Introduction
The demand for new service models
The service delivery landscape in Victoria is
improved ways to deliver services to farmers.
government in order to ensure productivity
encouraged to harness private sector skills and
support farmers.
changing as governments look for new and
Victorian famers need improved services from
and competitiveness. Government is being
to work collaboratively with private industry to
The Victorian Department of Primary Industries (DPI) developed the “Better Services to Farmers
Strategy (BSTF)” (DPI 2009). In fostering a new service model, DPI focused public funding on
services that address public priorities and worked collaboratively with industry to focus on its
priorities. Critically, DPI was not to compete with effective private or community providers but
would invest in growing the capability of industry. One of the proposed service types was
“wholesaling” which involved DPI program managers delivering services collaboratively with
third party providers.
Whilst encouraging innovative service delivery alongside traditional extension services, DPI
wanted to maintain service quality and concurrently establish successful relationships with
industry partners for mutual benefit. The new service model also presented challenges.
Outsourcing and alliance literature (Hunter 2004, Kaine and Keeble 2007) showed that
collaborative service delivery could work well, but there were risks to be managed. Keeble and
Kaine (2009) highlighted risks including tensions due to competing or different priorities,
reduced quality and timeliness of activities, agencies being exposed to opportunism where they
were dependent on each other and core priorities being undermined if access to crucial
intelligence like customer preferences or changes in the operating environment were restricted.
Appropriate governance and management strategies to address these risks were warranted.
Background: wholesaling
Whilst the DPI identifies three distinct forms of wholesaling, of particular interest was direct
wholesaling; “the provision of and/or packaging of information and knowledge to an
intermediary who delivers products and services to the farmer” (DPI, 2009). In our case studies
we wanted to explore how this type of wholesaling was being managed.
Case study: wholesaling horticulture services
DPI’s Horticulture branch led the way in trialling wholesaling service models in DPI and its
experiences are the focus of this paper. The Horticulture Industry Network (HIN) is a new
service provided by DPI designed to facilitate co-investment, collaboration and support between
DPI and 16 horticultural associations. The HIN was identified as an example of direct
wholesaling. The HIN collaborative network approach is an innovative way to address major
impediments to industry growth including lack of service sector capability. The HIN facilitates
the adoption of improved technologies and best practice, and prepares industry for more
effective emergency response.
Critical to the creation of the HIN was the establishment of a DPI grant program whereby
industry associations could apply for funding to support their engagement of specialist Industry
Development Officers (IDO’s). These IDO’s were employed within their industry associations to
work with growers. DPI provided IDOs with relevant intelligence (pertaining to DPI core
business), coordination (secretariat administration support), capacity development support,
training and knowledge resources for best practice extension advice and research. IDO’s have
the primary relationship with growers, not DPI, which is a shift from the traditional extension
model (Figure 1).
92
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
Figure 2. Traditional and “Direct Wholesaling” Models of extension
Traditional Extension Model:
“Direct Wholesaling” Model:
There is complexity involved in the funding arrangement for the HIN and the IDO’s which is cofunded by DPI and multiple external funding partners (including but not limited to Horticulture
Australia Limited (HAL) and the Grape and Wine Research and Development Corporation
(GWRDC)). This funding arrangement is for three years, after which it is hoped the service will
encourage industry investment.
Research purpose
Wholesaling, such as the HIN, is a marked departure from traditional extension models and a
radical change in the way DPI program managers operate (Higson et al. 2009). Program
managers needed to develop new skills and competencies and an investigation into the way the
new service types were implemented was warranted. The aim of this case study of the direct
wholesaling model using the HIN vehicle was to observe what the new service constituted, how
it was being managed, and hopefully reveal the complexities (including risks) managers faced.
By capturing these experiences, data could be used to develop tools to support program
managers in the selection and management of new service types.
Method/Research procedures
Approach: Relationship Choice Framework
The Relationship Choice Framework (RCF) provides an opportunity to use organisational
management theory to analyse and improve management of extension services models,
including wholesaling. The RCF is an adaption of Hunter’s (2004) multidisciplinary framework
that was designed to support public and private sector agencies to consider the appropriateness
of alternative service delivery (Kaine and Keeble 2008). The RCF can be used to predict the
appropriate governance and management strategies that will support a relationship between
agencies to operate successfully together. It enables program managers to consider the
implications of sharing services with external service providers from three dimensions:
governance; strategy; and human resource management. The three dimensions provided a
framework for interview questions and analysis of new service types (Kaine and Keeble 2008).
Method
In studying the HIN, we undertook an intensive examination within the richness of the real
world setting, allowing the unique features of the case to be observed and fully explained
(Bryman 2001). This data would also provide a basis for tool development for program
managers if required.
We first conducted a detailed document analysis to understand how the HIN was being
delivered. Organisational reports and program documents held relevant information about the
HIN and the context within which the relationships between DPI and external industry
organisations operated. Interviews with key program managers were undertaken to deepen our
understanding of the relationships between the organisations and identify management
responses in place to support their relationship. Two researchers attended each interview.
Researchers used a semi-structured approach similar to that used by Hunter (2004). The
interview questions were qualitative and of a mix of structured questions based on the service
types (drawn from the RCF) and open-ended questions to assist interviewees to explore and
articulate their experiences (Grunert and Grunert 1995).
Given this was an exploratory study, the results provide useful insights, but the research team
recognises there may be other approaches that are equally useful. The data collected during the
interview process allowed us to visualise, describe and analyse all the relationships involved in
delivering the HIN service by establishing a “relationship map” (see Figure 2). This map
provides background on the HIN by showing direct, indirect, and formal and informal relations
among parties involved.
Results Using the RCF as a guide, the case study analysis aimed to answer four key questions.
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
93
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
1. What relationships are involved in the HIN?
The HIN is an example of direct wholesaling. That is, DPI internally produced information and
services that were delivered to an intermediary (being the various IDO’s) who then delivered to
the external farmer client.
Figure 1: Relationships involved delivering the HIN service.
Case study analysis confirmed there was a direct wholesaling relationship between DPI and the
IDOs, of which there were sixteen individual relationships to manage. DPI also had other
wholesaling relationships to support the direct wholesaling activities. These included contracting
(web design, technical capability support) and formal collaboration arrangements to fund the
IDO’s (facilitated through for example, Horticulture Australia Limited). Relationship mapping
(Figure 2) revealed DPI was managing a complex set of relationships to successfully deliver the
HIN service and these relationships were interdependent and critical to service quality.
2. Are there strategic risks that DPI needs to manage to ensure successful
service delivery through the HIN model?
Delivering a service using a wholesaling model has the potential to create strategic risks for
program managers. In particular, protecting service timeliness and quality and the achievement
of core organisational objectives were important (Keeble & Kaine 2009).
Using the RCF to analyse the HIN identified that DPI was sharing activities that underpinned or
contributed to core objectives. For example, DPI relied on IDOs to share information about DPI
objectives such as emergency response and fostering productivity and sustainability.
In addition, under the new wholesaling service model, the interactions with DPI’s traditional
customer (horticultural producers), were now managed by the IDOs. This meant that DPI relied
on the IDOs for customer intelligence and for indication of changes in service needs and
preferences. The HIN program staff had to regularly communicate to share this intelligence.
They undertook a range of workshops to support a mutual understanding of each others’ core
priorities and establish a set of agreed priorities for the HIN service. Some examples of the key
management strategies the HIN used included:




94
DPI led meetings with IDOs every eight weeks to share product and client information
Industry updates from IDOs to address knowledge transfer
HIN website for access and intelligence between different industry groups and DPI
Training (for IDOs) to enable staff learning about DPI priorities and undertaking the role.
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
3. What type of governance arrangements will best serve the HIN participants?
The RCF proposes that if agencies are required to invest in specialist expertise (type of activity)
that is not easily substituted, or if activities required to deliver the service are uncertain at the
outset or delivered infrequently, then agencies need a governance structure that promotes
regular interaction, enables flexibility to change activities as new information comes to light and
acknowledges dependencies between agencies by confirming their commitment to each other.
This protects parties against opportunism and stranded assets. This type of relationship is
resource intensive and can be administratively costly and is thus best suited to long term
relationships.
Using the RCF activity criteria, analysis showed there were many activities to produce the HIN
service, which fell into three categories: professional development of industry staff;
technological resources; and, information and advice. Most activities were classified as relying
on specialist expertise. Additionally, DPI was investing in IDOs who had specialist skills to
deliver services to horticulturalists. Thus, analysis showed there were dependencies between
DPI and industry partners (IDOs). As such, appropriate governance, which would best support
parties to produce these activities and characterised by long term contracts and codependencies between organisations, was needed. This is termed “bilateral governance”. Below
is a list of management strategies used by HIN program managers that enable bilateral
governance:





Agreed deliverables and workplans to deliver on priorities
Flexibility to adjust activities as new information came to light
Systems to foster regular interaction between IDOs and DPI (e.g. meet every 8 weeks)
Forums to establish relationship and trust in set up phase of the project
Contracts with industry associations to employ IDOs (funding, milestones).
4. How can the HIN manage staff to promote performance?
The degree to which staff are responsible for creating value in an organisation should dictate the
human resource management style used by that organisation (Keeble & Kaine 2009, Legge
2005). Analysis of the HIN identified there were human resource implications of direct
wholesaling services to IDOs. In particular, the need to support two workforces, internal and
external, in a way that fostered collaboration and treated staff like assets. Treating staff as
assets is particularly important when staff are fundamental to organisational performance.
Analysis confirmed that specialised staff were the primary resource of value for the HIN. DPI
staff had to develop new competencies (relationship management, advisory support) and
support IDO’s to develop their roles and capabilities. Examples of the human resource strategies
used to enable direct wholesaling for HIN are listed below:





Enabing IDO’s to have access to DPI specialists to meet industry needs
Creating a DPI Horticulture network with DPI specialists
DPI mentoring industry staff and relationships (champions), face to face
Conducting a skills audit for IDOs
Providing human resource (HR) management support in the establishment phase.
Discussion/Conclusion
1. Delivering services - recognising the complexity
Mapping the relationships involved to deliver the HIN services revealed that the direct
wholesaling relationship with the IDOs was one of many relationships that DPI managed to
achieve the service. DPI managed contractual and collaborative relationships, internal informal
relationships and tradition extension relationships. All relationships were interdependent.
Additionally, DPI managed 16 individual industry relationships to achieve direct wholesaling, a
considerable demand on resources. Mapping HIN relationships revealed the complexity program
managers deal with, and the interdependencies for success many relationships present.
Relationship mapping exercises reveal the nature and extent of relationship complexity
managers may have to deal with when introducing wholesaling and help to identify strategies
required to maintain service quality.
2. Direct wholesaling: a shift in the primary relationship
In direct wholesaling there was a shift in the primary relationship of critical importance to DPI.
Specifically, IDO’s now undertook the primary contact with growers, in accordance with the
BSTF principles of not competing with the private or community sector. In the traditional
extension model, DPI would undertake this role. For the HIN, this meant that specific new
activities were developed to support IDO capacity and produce information and advisory
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
95
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
services. As the RCF predicted, DPI had to understand this customer’s preferences and also, as
IDOs had the direct relationship with growers, DPI relied on them for intelligence about growers
preferences. Systems and structures to communicate new customer and grower preferences
were required. DPI was now dependent on IDOs to achieve their core objectives with growers.
Whilst the wholesaled service remains similar in terms of information and knowledge, the
customer has fundamentally changed. As this study shows, program managers may need
support to develop appropriate activities for this customer. Meeting new customers’ needs can
present challenges. For example, DPI used a sophisticated suite of tools including websites,
forums, web-based information packages, software and hardware to facilitate HIN activities and
foster communication and intelligence sharing. Consideration of the resources required (e.g.
time and equipment) and establishment of systems (e.g. regular communication forums) is
needed, as is facilitating the co-operation of both internal and external staff. With this new
collection of resources, aimed at a new client, it is prudent to support managers so they can
continue to deliver DPI core objectives in this new model.
3. Appropriate governance-service activities provide a guide
Using the RCF to classify HIN activities produced by DPI and industry partners revealed they
have different characteristics and some present risks, namely, sharing customised activities and
dependencies where investments in staff skills or assets are specialised. It is important to note
that according to the RCF the term governance refers to the arrangements between two
organisations about:
1. what transactions occur between them; and
2. the rules that guide the way they behave towards each other in the exchange of transactions.
In line with the RCF a transaction is an exchange of goods or services that occur between two
organisations. The characteristics of these transactions can guide the selection of RCF
governance arrangements that will best facilitate the exchange of transactions between
organisations.
In this instance opportunism can arise if governance does not address risks. As predicted for
many activities, appropriate governance was required to provide agency protection and foster
commitment and contract flexibility to adapt activities as new information came to light. Regular
communication was essential for HIN and a foundation of appropriate governance, characterised
by long term contracts and co-dependencies between organisations, was required.
The interviews highlighted the way the HIN management adapted to the challenges that
delivering new products and services entailed. The management team fine-tuned governance to
facilitate this, adapting from a trilateral governance arrangement, which privileged a fixed term
of engagement where organisations are semi dependent on each other for an agreed time. As
the complexity of delivery evolved they adapted the transactions and behaviours involved, to
best placed to deliver on outcomes. The case study showed that over time, HIN governance
moved towards a bilateral arrangement which was important for effective delivery. Bilateral
governance involves long-term exchanges, where organisations acknowledge their
interdependencies, and the responsibility for dispute resolution lies more with the organisations
involved. As the program evolved, new characteristics emerged which facilitated this switch,
including the dependence on IDOs in delivering key outcomes for the DPI.
However, bilateral governance requires more resources and is administratively costly. This was
warranted for HIN as it’s envisioned to be a longer term relationship. However, there is concern
about how this relationship will be maintained without IDO funding in the future. The RCF
provides a useful tool for classifying activities and matching them to appropriate governance
types and management strategies to address identified risks.
4. Working together to achieve core priorities
Another important insight was the risks to organisations sharing activities that underpin their
core organisational objectives. Naturally, organisations have different priorities, and a process of
alignment for agreed service activities will ensure service quality is maintained and core
priorities are protected. When organisations share core activities, careful attention needs to be
given to how alignment of priorities is fostered. The HIN case study offers a range of ways this
can be addressed. For example, systems to communicate priorities (workshops, website) and
structures like joint planning and agreed priority documents were used in this instance.
Interviewees acknowledged the challenges of motivating external organisations to deliver on
government priorities when they already have industry and customer priorities to address. We
96
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
suggest tools to assist both parties align service priorities will remain important to successful
delivery.
5. Staff- the critical factor
The case study provided valuable insights into the importance of staff to performance and
successful adoption of new service delivery models, particularly if they are the primary
investment to achieve organisational objectives. The HIN case study also illustrated the human
resource (HR) complexities faced when establishing a new service type like wholesaling. At the
outset, program managers did not realise the level of capacity development required for DPI
and IDOs to deliver the direct wholesaling service. Consequently both parties focused
considerable resources and activities on skills development. Wholesaling also required a
different set of skills than originally anticipated including advocacy, lobbying, communication
and relationship management, rather than technical skills. Skills audits were a useful
management strategy used. Both industry associations and DPI fostered a soft HR approach to
support staff which mitigated risks to performance. The HR management strategies used in the
HIN case study provided a useful guide for other managers interested in wholesaling services.
References
Bryman A (2001) Social research methods Oxford University Press, New York
Davis, G., J. Wanna, et al. (1993) ‘Public Policy in Australia’ Allen & Unwin
Hunter, J. (2004) ‘Investigating the complexity of outsourcing decisions: an interpretive approach’ Armidale,
Australia, University of New England. Doctorate of Philosophy.
Grunert, K. G. and S. C. Grunert 1995, 'Measuring subjective meaning structures by the laddering method:
theoretical considerations and methodological problems,' International Journal of Research in Marketing,
vol. 12, pp. 209-225.
Kaine, G. and B. Keeble (2007) ‘Organisational relationships and the implementation of natural resource
policy’ Tatura, Victorian Government, Department of Primary Industries: 46.
Keeble, B., G. Kaine, et al. (2008). A new framework to investigate how organisational relationships support
natural resource policy implementation: a case study of irrigation policy in the Shepparton irrigation
region. D. o. P. Industries. Melbourne, Australia: 52.
Keeble, B., Kaine, G., Higson, M. (2009) ‘Decision trees to support wholesale relationships: a concept paper’
Department of Primary Industries Report, Victoria, Australia.
Keeble, B., Kaine, G., Sampson, K. (forthcoming) Adapting Hunter’s outsourcing framework to reveal how
organisations implement natural resource policy together: a case study of the irrigation policy in the
Shepparton Irrigation Region in Victoria, Journal article
Patton, MQ (1990) Qualitative interviewing: a technique for qualitative data collection, Sage Publications,
USA
Sardelic, J., Keeble, B. (2010) ‘Preliminary Environmental Analysis Survey and People Overview –
Wholesaling’ Internal Document Department Of Primary Industries, Victoria, Australia.
Victorian Department of Primary Industries 2009, Better Services to Farmers, State Government of Victoria,
Victoria, Australia
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
97
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
Eliciting New Zealand hill country farmers’ decisions to
participate in a voluntary soil conservation strategy
Neels Botha1 and Hein Roth2
2
1
AgResearch Ltd, Private Bag 3123, Hamilton, New Zealand 3240
Omega Consulting Ltd, PO Box 4699, Mt Maunganui, Tauranga 3030
Email: [email protected]
Introduction
Managing the effects of using freshwater and land is one of the responsibilities of New Zealand’s
12 Regional Councils, while the Department of Conservation is responsible for the conservation
of New Zealand’s natural and historic heritage. New Zealand has a small open and export driven
economy that is sensitive to and dependent upon international markets (Ministry for the
Environment n.d.; New Zealand facts 2010). Preserving this market is important and the
pastoral industry is working hard to retain its clean and green image by encouraging and
supporting economic and environmentally friendly farming systems that also provide an
acceptable lifestyle. New Zealand society is losing its patience with the negative impacts that
some farming practices have on the environment and Regional Councils have been responding
to increasing levels of societal pressure on them to address the situation (Penno and McLeish
2002).
One area where this has occurred is the Manawatu/Wanganui Region, a location governed by
the “Horizons” Regional Council. This region is situated towards the lower west coast of the
North Island. The foundation of the region’s economy is pasture-based farming (dairy, sheep
and beef). The area consists of approximately 1.6 million hectares of land classified as hill
country, 300,000 hectares of which is highly susceptible to erosion. Such susceptibility became
apparent in 2004, when several major storms impacted 100,000 hectares of hill country,
causing two hundred million tonnes of soil erosion throughout the region and 30 million tonnes
of sediment to enter the local rivers (Horizons Regional Council 2007). Aside from storms, past
land resource management practices (e.g. vegetation clearance) have added to problems
surrounding the long-term sustainability of the region’s land and soils.
Against the above contextual backdrop, and in an effort to better protect and conserve local soil
resources, the Horizons Regional Council have identified 1,500 farms consisting of ‘Highly
Erodible Land’ (HEL). They have also introduced a voluntary initiative broadly aimed at
encouraging a move to more sustainable land use practices across the region. This voluntary
program called the ‘Sustainable Land Use Initiative’ (SLUI). The specific objectives of the
initiative are to identify and incentivise opportunities for sustainable land use change on these
farms and to encourage farmers to farm responsibly from an environmental perspective (ibid).
One key component of SLUI is the development of fully subsidised Whole Farm Plans (WFPs) for
properties consisting of HEL. To date, however, only 159 WFPs have been developed, indicating
low farmer involvement in the Regional Council’s initiative. The question we seek to address in
this paper is why more farmers are not participating in the WFP conservancy strategy? To
investigate this question, we explored the farmer decision making process, with a specific focus
on their decision to participate or abstain from opting into the Regional Council’s initiative.
Aims
The research aims were to: (1) describe hill country farmers’ adoption decision-making process
regarding WFP; (2) identify at what stage of the decision-making process non-participants chose
not to participate; (3) elicit guidelines for enhancing participation.
Criteria for successful farmer engagement
The vast extension literature provides broad guidelines about how to better engage farmers in
activities and initiatives developed to enhance productivity and improve sustainability. For any
voluntary behaviour change strategy like extension to succeed, a sense of urgency around the
need for change has to exist (Kotter 1996), social support for the change is required (Brown
et.al., 2008), as well as personal responsibility (Botha 2008(a); Parminter et al. 2007). Open,
honest, and consistent communication by the change agent is required, the target group has to
acknowledge the importance of the issue, be committed to addressing it and have the desire to
see the change through to its completion (Kotter 1996). It also requires change agents to
develop a sincere and genuine understanding of the views and concerns of the target group
(Peoples, 2008). With both parties working in collaboration with each other, the aim is to
develop a relationship of trust and co-operation (Blackett and Botha 2007) and to identify
appropriate means for effectively addressing the issue. A close fit between the solution and the
98
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
farming system encourages buy-in (Botha 2008(b); Kotter 1996), with the proposed solution
seen to be an option to realistically solve (or help solve) the issue (Brown et al. 2008), and the
cost, benefits, and implications of the solutions must be clear (Bewsell et al. 2008; Brown et al.
2008). Finally, user confidence is important (Botha 2008(b)).
Methodology and research approach
This research used the ethnographic decision tree modelling (EDTM) approach developed by
Gladwin (1989). EDTM describes adoption as a cognitive process; it identifies specific decision
criteria and is a descriptive and predictive model that examines real world decisions and the
criteria that influence them (Darnhofer and Schneeberger 2005; Gladwin 1989; Murray-Prior
1998). EDTM is based on open-ended individual ethnographic interviews that elicit and
investigate specific decision criteria from decision makers themselves. The outcome of EDTM is
to develop a decision tree, table, or set of decision rules (Beck 2005). Ethnographic interviewing
acknowledges participants’ expertise and their beliefs as they relate to the specific decision to
be made. As such, it explores participants’ thinking and describes and diagrams, in their own
terms, the reasons for their actions.
EDTM consists of three phases (i.e. Exploration, Model Development and Model Testing) and
enables the researcher to obtain a deep and complex understanding of the criteria that influence
participants’ decision-making with regards to a specific subject. The aim is to develop an
inclusive decision tree with research participants by eliciting a series of connecting decision
criteria on the decision that is studied. This decision tree represents the participant group’s
thinking and reasons for their actions. Discrete questions are used to elicit decision criteria and
are followed by either ‘true’ or ‘false’ answers, by participants, for any particular subject. The
decision rules should describe the progressive train of thought of all participants and arrive at
an outcome that is true for individual participants and the group. The aim with EDTM is for the
decision tree to be predictive of a participant’s decision, once decision criteria are known. Thus,
if a certain set of criteria is true for a participant, the tree would predict their decision in
advance of observing what they actually do (Gladwin 1989).
Through the EDTM process everything participants considered during their decision-making
process was identified. We called them the “criteria” participants used and described them in
the decision tree as statements.
Following the EDTM process, this research involved three distinct phases:
1.
2.
3.
Individual ethnographic interviews
Initial model development
Model testing and refining
The first phase of the EDTM process consisted of individual ethnographic interviews held with a
random sample of 15 WFP participants and 14 non-participants. Participants were identified
from a list of farmers provided by Horizons Regional Council. Non-participants were identified
using three sources: names provided by the Regional Council, a list of farmer names provided
by Federated Farmers, and rural community lists provided by farmers themselves. We used a
geographically stratified random sample of farmers.
All interviews were unstructured and conducted on-farm. At the start of each non-participant
interview, the interviewee was asked to give his/her views regarding WFP for the researcher to
get an understanding of their awareness of WFP. They were then prompted to provide an
overview of the decision process they had followed up to the point where they actually decided
not to participate. WFP participants were prompted to give an account of all the things they
considered since hearing about WFP, up to the point where they made the decision to
participate. The researcher occasionally asked questions to get clarity about aspects that were
unclear and to elicit and better understand the motivations and constraints that appeared
critical to decision-making. Interviewees were viewed and treated as the experts who had good
and valid reasons for their decisions. Every interview was audio taped and analysed afterwards
to identify the key decision criteria and constraints in the adoption decision process. An
individual decision tree was developed for each participant. Then, a staged composite decisionmaking model was built; it represents the decision-making process of the whole group. In
addition to the composite model, a single summarised decision tree, depicting key decision
points, was also developed.
During the last stage of the research, the summarized and composite decision tree models were
tested and refined with all participants. This was done through a second round of visits to all the
interviewees, inviting their input regarding each of the two decision trees. In addition to the
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
99
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
composite model, a single summarised decision tree, depicting the five key decision points for
participating in the WFP program, was also developed.
Findings
Table 1 shows the summarised decision tree. The decision points are phrased as statements
with which interviewees either agreed or disagreed. Agreement means the interviewee
proceeded to the next statement while disagreement means they decided not to participate, and
dropped out of the decision making process. In that manner, interviewees proceeded through
the decision making process with some dropping out of the process at different stages of the
process.
Table 1. Key decision criteria for participating in the Whole Farm Plan program
Number of participants who:
Key decision criteria
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Soil conservation and water quality are regional issues
and also present on my farm
Retiring land on my farm by fencing/tree planting will
help solve the issue
The perceived benefits of a WFP are sufficient to
encourage me to participate
I trust the Regional Council and its staff; they have
farmers’ interests in mind
I am willing to invest extra time, effort, and capital into
the development and implementation of a WFP for my
farm
Agreed and
continued with
the decision
making process
Disagreed and
decided not to
participate in
WFP
25
4
19
6
19
0
15
4
15
0
The results showed that hill country farmers’ WFP decision-making process was based on five
key decision points: (1) awareness of and concern for soil conservation and water quality issues
across regional and farm scales; (2) the perceived impact of the efforts when addressing these
issues; (3) the perceived benefits of using a WFP; (4) perceptions of the Regional Council
related to trust; and (5) perceived costs associated with participating in WFP.
Discussion
The first decision point was acknowledging the problem, at two levels; regional and local. From
interviewees’ narratives it was evident that previous personal experience of storm related stock
and land losses strongly influenced their awareness of the problem as well as the vulnerability of
their businesses to extreme climatic events. Their views of the problem varied from issues on
their own farms to regional ones that included poor water drinkability, aquatic life deterioration,
and waterways losing their aesthetic value. Crisis create motivation; farmers who have
previously had bad experiences in terms of natural resource damage during floods and storms
were motivated to participate in the WFP program. Four of the 14 interviewees who decided not
to adopt WFP, did so at this point in the decision making process; they believed there was
neither a regional nor a local problem with soil erosion.
The second decision point was the belief that the solution, i.e. effectively retiring land from
grazing by planting trees and/or fencing will successfully address the issue of soil erosion and
associated loss of productive land. Interviewees associated land topography, soil types and their
proneness to soil erosion, as well as rivers and streams flowing through or bordering their own
properties, with the potential positive environmental impacts to be gained if they retired land
and/or planted trees. Associated with this belief, was participants’ views of whether their farms
were developed ‘sufficiently’, i.e. further fencing and/or tree planting was unnecessary. They
also associated additional fencing and tree planting with improved biodiversity and aesthetics.
Six of the 14 WFP non-participants, exited at this point of the decision making process, which
makes it a critical juncture.
The third decision point was the benefits interviewees believed they would get if they
participated in the WFP program. In this regard the cost-sharing of fencing and tree planting as
well as technical support were significant motivators for farmers to participate in the WFP
program. Research participants associated the benefits of improved biodiversity and aesthetics
with improved land values. Table 1 shows that nobody exited at this stage of the decision
making process. This means that interviewees believed that they would actually save money
while improving land value by participating in WFP. These gains were considered sufficient to
continue considering participating in the WFP program.
100
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
The fourth decision point was the degree to which research participants trusted the Regional
Council. This trust consisted of two parts. Firstly, they believed that if many farmers
participated, the Regional Council would make the use of WFP compulsory and they did not want
that to happen. They did not want to be told what to do on their own properties and they did
not want to provide the authorities with anything that could be used against them. Secondly,
participants believed that, as far as farming matters were concerned, Regional Council staff
lacked the expertise to run the WFP program successfully because they were viewed as unable
to successfully link natural resource management with their farming systems. Four of the 14
WFP non-participants dropped out at this point of the decision making process.
The fifth decision point was research participants’ willingness and ability to bear the costs
related to participation, i.e. the costs associated with developing and implementing the WFP,
which included time, effort, and capital. None of the research participants dropped out at this
stage, supposedly because they believed the gains to be had outweighed the costs.
The findings of this research provide useful guidelines for encouraging participation which are
summarised in Table 2.
Table 2. Guidelines for encouraging participation
Key decision criteria
1.
Acknowledge the issue and accept responsibility 2.
The solution will fix the problem 3.
There are great benefits
4.
Build trust 5.
There are costs but the benefits outweigh them Guidelines
Convince farmers that there are problems at regional and local levels and
encourage them to take personal responsibility for the effects of erosion on
their own farms and across the region.
Create a sense of urgency to change and be honest, open and consistent
when communicating with farmers.
Show farmers the realities and extent of the impacts of hill country erosion at
regional and local levels. This will help to generate social support for change.
Provide farmers with the confidence that the solution will fix the problem. Use
research findings and success stories of local farmers to demonstrate the
success of fencing and tree planting.
When communicating, acknowledge farmers’ views that WFP will enhance
biodiversity and the aesthetic value of their farms, and link it to the benefits
derived from cost sharing and technical support.
Develop a sincere and genuine understanding of farmers’ views and concerns.
Move from a contractual relationship to a partnership relationship by sharing
the risks associated with erosion; use cost sharing as a leverage point. Be
serious in terms of collaborating with farmers in solving the problem. Address
staff capability issues perceived by farmers. Involve farmers in decision
making at local and regional levels as far as erosion management and control
is concerned. Avoid a litigious approach – this is a last resort.
Publicly praise and encourage farmers who have invested extra time, effort,
and capital into the development and implementation of a WFP. Portray these
farms as sustainable businesses.
Three key lessons



There were three critical decision points during the decision-making process where nonparticipants deliberately choose not to participate; not acknowledging the problem,
believing the solution will not fix the problem, and distrusting the Regional Council
These points are identifiable doorways for change, i.e. focus on these two beliefs and on
building trust when promoting participation in the program
Trust and collaboration between farmers and local government is important for successful
natural resource governance
Acknowledgements
We acknowledge the time and effort of all research participants and the financial contribution of
the Foundation of Research Science and Technology towards this research.
References
Beck KA 2005, ‘Ethnographic Decision Tree Modelling: A Research Method for Counselling Psychology’,
Journal of Counselling Psychology, 52(2): 243-249.
Bewsell D, Botha N and Brown M 2008, ‘Understanding Pasture Renewal in New Zealand’, Report on market
research for the PRCT, Hamilton.
Blackett P and Botha N 2007, ‘Review of Farmer Needs for Farm Management Tools’, Unpublished report,
Hamilton, AgResearch Ltd
Botha N 2008(a), ‘Meta Analysis of Adoption Research in New Zealand: Principles, Guidelines and Findings
of Direct Applicability to Extension Approaches and Planning in the Dairy Industry’, Report for DairyNZ,
Hamilton.
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
101
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
Botha N 2008(b), ‘The Adoption and Use of Environmental Technologies: Insights from Social Research’,
Paper Presented at the Environmental Forum/Workshop, LIC, Hamilton, March 2008.
Brown M, Bewsell D and Walcroft J 2008, ‘P21-Pasture Measurement Tools and Systems: En User’s
Requirements’, Unpublished report, Hamilton: AgResearch Ltd
Darnhofer I and Schneeberger W 2005, ‘Converting the not converting to organic farming in Austria: Farmer
types and their rationale’, Agriculture and Human Values, 22: 39-52.
Gladwin CH 1989, Ethnographic Decision Tree Modelling. Newbury Park, California: Sage Publications Inc.
Horizons Regional Council 2007, The Proposed One Plan – the Consolidated Resource Policy Statement,
Regional Plan and Regional Coastal Plan for the Manawatu-Wanganui Region. Palmerston North:
Horizons Regional Council. Available from: http://www.horizons.govt.nz/assets/publications/about-uspublications/one-plan-publications-and-reports/proposed-one-plan/Chapter5_land.pdf [accessed 19 June
2009]
Kotter JP 1996, Leading Change. Boston, Massachusetts: Harvard Business School Press.
Ministry for the Environment. (undated). Valuing New Zealand’s clean green image. Downloaded from
http://www.mfe.govt.nz/publications/sus-dev/clean-green-image-value-aug01/executive-summaryaug01.pdf April 2010.
Murray-Prior R 1998, ‘Modelling farmer behaviour: A personal construct theory interpretation of hierarchical
decision models’, Agricultural Systems, 57(4): 541-556.
New Zealand facts 2010, Downloaded from http://www.virtualoceania.net/newzealand/facts/ April 2010.
Parminter T, Barrett-Ohia O and Wilson J 2007, Adoption of Nutrient Budgeting at Rerewhakaaitu.
Unpublished report, Hamilton: AgResearch Ltd
Penno J and McLeish P 2002, ‘Win-Win Relationship to Benefit Dexcel, Dairy Farmers and Rural
Professionals’, Primary Industry Management, 4(5): 30-32.
Peoples S 2008, ‘The Impact of the Development Process on the Adoption of Farming Technology: A
Literature Review’, Unpublished report, Hamilton: AgResearch Ltd
102
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
Using structured self-assessment to improve cross cultural
extension in the vegetable industry of the Northern Territory
Stuart Smith, Megan Connelly and Warren Hunt
Department of Resources, GPO Box 3000, Darwin, Northern Territory 0801
Email [email protected]
Keywords: Vegetables, agricultural extension, cross-cultural, Vietnamese farmers, Northern
Territory
Introduction
Vegetable production from the Darwin rural region is valued at around $20 million per year
(NTG 2010) with major commodities including cucumber, snake bean, okra and “Asian” melons
(e.g. long, bitter, hairy and winter). The industry is growing, fuelled by demand in eastern
Australian population centres for these vegetables in the winter months, which corresponds to
the ‘dry’ season in Darwin. Most vegetable production in Darwin is by growers of non-English
speaking backgrounds (NESB), primarily Vietnamese and Cambodian. There were three distinct
geographic districts for the vegetable growers, Marrakai; Humpty-Doo / Marrakai and Berry
Springs/Darwin River. The Department of Resources (DoR), of the Northern Territory
Government, is currently running an extension program with these growers. The objectives of
the program are to:
1.
2.
improve the quality of vegetables that the NT is growing for eastern markets, and;
enhance the sustainability of the industry.
Working toward these objectives, the staff involved in the program sought to engage with this
farming community through one-on-one visits, distribution of translated literature, e.g.,
integrated pest management posters, product description languages and Agnotes; and group
meetings. Growers suggested leading grower sheds on which to hold the meetings in each
growing area. Meetings were held during the dry season of 2011 (May-August). The technical
focus of 2011 was to change grower behaviours toward best practice in irrigation management,
integrated pest management and post harvest handling of vegetables.
This program was the first engagement with this sector in a non-regulatory way for the
Northern Territory Government in many years. It did offer a number of cultural challenges that
had been highlighted by other authors such as Bradley (2008) and Morgan (2003). These
challenges include:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Establishment of effective working relationships with NESB growers.
Developing understanding of the issues and factors that drive and influence grower
practices.
Identifying growers framing and information needs (Morgan 2003).
Determining ways to work effectively with NESB growers to foster a culture of
sustainability (Bradley 2008).
Other important issues that were considered included:
1.
2.
Growers rarely consulted with NT Government agencies or personnel.
Their preferred sources of information were friends, neighbours, relations and
agribusiness (Bradley 2008).
A number of different extension approaches were taken to engage with the NESB vegetable
growing sector. These included:
One-on-one visits where staff would visit growers on their properties during the day, to
establish relationships, discuss current issues and distribute translated resources such as
posters and Agnotes.
Demonstrations where wetting-front detectors and tensiometers were installed on leading
grower properties for demonstration at grower meetings.
Group meetings were also in farmer’s sheds in each of the main growing areas in the Darwin
rural region.
This paper describes some of the initial interactions with the NESB vegetable sector in the
Darwin rural region, and how the use of a structured analysis techniques (i.e., ORID) during a
periodic review, has helped refine and improve the extension initiative.
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
103
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
Method
Extension practices
A process of structured analysis - the ORID (objective, reflective, interpretive, decisional)
technique (Ross 1994; Stanfield 1997) was employed to analyse the process and efficacy of the
group meetings. This focussed conversation method was developed by the Canadian Institute of
Cultural Affairs as part of its technology of participation program. A facilitator guides a
conversation which flows from surface to depth (Stanfield 1997). Table 1 gives a summary
outline of this process.
Table 1: Outline of the ORID process of focussed conversation
Type of question
Objective (O)
Purpose
Begin with facts / data and
external reality
Evoke immediate personal
reactions, internal responses,
sometimes
emotions
or
feeling, hidden images and
associations with the facts
Draw out meaning, values,
significance and implications
Bring the conversation to a
close, eliciting resolution and
enabling the group to make a
decision about the future
Reflective (R)
Interpretive (I)
Decisional (D)
Example
What did you actually see,
hear or read?
What was your gut level
reaction?
What new insight did you get
from this?
What do you think we should
do?
This approach closely mirrors the normal process of moving from observations to beliefs called
the “Ladder of Inference” (Ross 1994). The Ladder of Inference describes the thinking processes
that most people logically go through, often without realizing it, to get from a fact to a decision
or action. Starting at the bottom of the process are reality and facts. From there, we (Mindtools
2011):






Experience these selectively based on our beliefs and prior experience.
Interpret what they mean.
Apply our existing assumptions, sometimes without considering them.
Draw conclusions based on the interpreted facts and our assumptions.
Develop beliefs based on these conclusions.
Take actions that seem "right" because they are based on what we believe
Beliefs have a major influence on how we select from reality, and can lead us to ignore the facts
altogether. Soon we are literally jumping to conclusions – by missing facts and skipping steps in
the reasoning process. Using ORID is a way to make sure each step in the thinking process is
well considered before conclusions are drawn. This structured approach was used specifically to
analyse the process of a particular group meeting in the Humpty Doo district held one midafternoon during the dry season, but its findings have equal applicability to other group
meetings, one-on-one visits and demonstrations conducted in the extension initiative.
Results
The analysis revealed several important issues in how the extension work was being conducted.
Issue 1: Meeting time
Objective
Reflective
Interpretive
Decisional
The meeting was held
at 2.30 pm at the
request of the
hostess. There was
good attendance (16
growers).
We thought the
growers might be
asleep and were
apprehensive that noone would come. We
were surprised that
growers attended.
We were wrong about
growers’ priorities and
the importance they
placed on attending
meetings over
afternoon sleep.
Taking note of the
host’s preferences for
meeting times should
be considered.
In future we will
consult growers
before determining
meeting times and
adjust accordingly.
104
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
Issue 2: Defining the name of the gathering
Objective
Reflective
Interpretive
Decisional
NESB growers looked
confused when we
used the word
“workshop” to
promote our events,
but looked satisfied
when we used the
word “meeting”.
We were confused
about how to
communicate what a
workshop was and
how it would benefit
the growers.
We need to find a
word that works with
the limited English
vocabulary of our
sector and we also
need to understand
that NESB growers
probably have a
limited vocabulary
compared to native
English speakers.
We would use the
word “meeting” with
all our future
communication; this
word had meaning for
most growers. We will
review all written
correspondence in
English and eliminate
uncommonly spoken
words.
Issue 3: Meeting preparation
Objective
Reflective
Interpretive
Decisional
The presentation
structure for the
meeting did not follow
our initial plan. Our
colleagues did not
have the
presentations ready
that we thought they
would present. The
main meeting
facilitator had to ‘wing
it’ when expected
presentations were
not forthcoming.
We experienced mild
panic, embarrassment
and disappointment in
ourselves for not
preparing more
thoroughly. We had
feelings that our
colleagues might not
be on the same track
as us but did not act
on it.
We learned that we
need to make sure
that everyone is on
the same track on our
team with what is
expected of a
meeting, especially
guest speakers or
‘experts’.
Before every meeting,
especially with guest
speakers, a rehearsal
of the meeting will be
held to make sure
everyone knows how
the meeting will run.
Issue 4: Language barriers
Objective
Reflective
Interpretive
Decisional
During the meeting
growers would talk to
each other in their
native language. Our
interpreter would only
translate our
presentation, and not
the discussion from
the floor back to us.
We were unsure of
the feedback the
growers were giving
to the group because
we could not
understand the
language. We felt
confused, lost and
helpless, and were
not sure if we were
having positive or
negative impact
because we could not
participate in group
discussion.
Without language we
could not adjust the
content of our
meetings to the needs
of the group. The only
feedback we get
where there is no
language is body
language. We also
could not tell if the
growers were
understanding our
material or not.
We decided to
develop an operating
framework for the
interpreter, which
asks them to give us
key feedback from
the floor discussion,
and understand our
need to participate in
discussion.
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
105
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
Issue 5: Presence and behaviour of a rural journalist
Objective
Reflective
Interpretive
Decisional
A rural journalist
arrived to cover the
meeting and took
photographs and
recorded discussion
without asking
permission. The
growers did not
object to this (in
English or otherwise
by body language).
We felt uncomfortable
that this may have
been considered
culturally rude or
unacceptable to the
growers.
We need to reconsider
our approach with
rural reporters at our
events.
Make sure we ask
(through the
interpreter) if it is OK
to take recordings
during a meeting.
Discuss with the
reporter before hand
that we will expect
permission to be
sought before taking
recordings.
Objective
Reflective
Interpretive
Decisional
Growers look
confused when asked
to move from the
meeting shed to the
demonstration site in
the shade house, and
mostly moved off into
small groups to chat
or smoke instead.
We felt confusion and
frustration that they
were not participating
in what was for us the
most important part
of the meeting, and,
from our experience,
the most important
part of a grower
meeting for native
English-speaking
Australian groups.
The lack of
participation of the
growers in the field
walk could have been
due to several
factors; lack of
interest, not knowing
the structure of the
meeting, an issue
with the interpretation
of our instruction or
an uncomfortable
feeling about looking
at the operation of
one of their
colleagues.
We decided to write
an agenda for the
meetings in
Vietnamese and
distribute / put up on
a board during the
meeting, so all
participants were
clear about what was
happening at different
times during the
meeting. We also
decided to make sure
the interpreter could
help us out by letting
the group know when
the meeting moved
from one part to the
next. In addition, we
will ask the
interpreter to ask the
growers for feedback
on their feeling about
field walks.
Issue 6: Field walk
Discussion
Using the ORID framework for analysis allowed us to slowly move through the “ladder of
inference” (Ross 1994) from actual observations and feelings about our extension activities, to
sound interpretations and decisions about how we run future activities. It has allowed us to
become aware of our own thinking and reasoning (reflection); made our thinking and reasoning
more visible to others (advocacy) and allowed us to inquire into how others think and reason
(inquiry) (Ross 1994).
The major finding from using this framework was that when working with people from nonEnglish speaking backgrounds, a skilled interpreter is necessary, but not without a framework
for operation that extended beyond giving a translation for our presentations to helping us:




106
Translate the agenda of meetings and verbally signpost to the group when we were
moving from one part of the meeting to the next.
Be aware of key feedback from the group in ‘on-the-floor’ discussion, and pass on this
feedback to us to help us adjust the meeting to the needs of the growers.
Participate in activity evaluation.
Offer cultural advice, where appropriate, translating behaviours as well as language.
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
We also discovered that some extra work with meeting preparation, such as asking growers
their preferred time and venue, preparing non-target meeting attendees like reporters,
rehearsal with key speakers and checking our language and vocabulary would all help the
meeting to run more smoothly and ensure communication was effective.
Conclusions
ORID allowed us to examine our longstanding assumptions (e.g. growers like field walks) and
realise that they might not be true in every cultural context, and our extension approach may
only be successful if we test and re-test assumptions about what works with a particular group.
This approach will be especially useful with NESB growers to establish effective working
relationships, develop an understanding of the issues and factors that drive and influence their
practices and identify their framing and information needs.
References
Bradley M (2008) Fostering a culture of sustainability with horticultural growers from non-English speaking
backgrounds (NESB) in the Northern Territory. CSIRO, Darwin.
Mindtools (2011) The ladder of inference. (Mind Tools Ltd).
Morgan WC (2003) Communication with Asian non English speaking background vegetable growers - A pilot
project for adoption of best practice. Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation 03/034,
Barton, ACT.
NTG (2010) NT Plant Industries Profile 2009. Department of Resources, Plant Industries Division, Berrimah.
Ross R (1994) Ladder of inference. In 'The fifth discipline fieldbook'. (Ed. PK Senge, A Roberts, C Ross, R
Smith, B ) pp. 242-246. (Currency: New York).
Stanfield R (1997) The art of focussed conversation. Canadian Institute of Cultural Affairs, Toronto.
Plate 1. Grower workshop in the Humpty doo/Lambells Lagoon area
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
107
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
Plate 2. One of the authors, Stuart Smith (in green shirt) with growers from nonEnglish speaking backgrounds
108
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
Reducing poverty through participatory action learning and
action research processes with smallholder vegetable farmers in
Mindanao
Roy Murray-Prior1, Floro T. Israel2, Ricarte G. Bacus2, Dante I. Apara2, Sylvia B.
Concepcion2, Marilou O. Montiflor2, Jerick Axalan2, Ruby J.G. Lamban2, Rodel R. Real2,
Peter J. Batt3 and Maria Fay Rola-Rubzen3
1 Curtin University, Muresk Campus, Northam, WA 6401
2 University of the Philippines Mindanao, Davao, Philippines
3 Curtin University, Bentley Campus, Perth, WA.
Email: [email protected]
Keywords: agribusiness, supply chains, development, capacity building
Introduction
Smallholder vegetable farmers in the vegetable bowl of the Philippines – Mindanao – are faced
with opportunities and threats arising from the changing nature of their markets. This comes
from two main sources, the increasing market share of supermarkets and competition from
imported product arising from the entry of the Philippines into the World Trade Organisation.
Unfortunately, smallholder farmers have difficulty accessing the higher value supermarket and
other institutional market chains because, amongst other things, their small size means they
can’t deliver the volume of consistent quality product required by these value chains. A
smallholder vegetable farmer in Mindanao has a farm of between one and two hectares
(although only about two thirds own their farms). On average, they earn less than A$2,000 per
year from their farming operations and have about eight years of primary school education.
While their soils are generally fertile and rainfall is plentiful, their key constraints are poor
infrastructure (particularly roads), losses due to excessive rain, lack of access to finance,
fluctuating prices and limited access to and knowledge of alternative markets, and limited
access to physical and information inputs for producing vegetables.
The University of the Philippines Mindanao’s School of Management, its Upstream Foundation
and Curtin University have been involved in an ACIAR funded project which has been
investigating a process to overcome these constraints by organising smallholder farmers into
small groups of collaborating farmers, or clusters, and taking them through a capacity-building
process so that they can expand their market opportunities and improve their income. This
participatory process known as the ‘Clustering approach for agroenterprise development’ (CRSPhilippines 2007) was developed and used by the Catholic Relief Services. It is based on process
developed by the Centre for International Tropical Agriculture (CIAT 2001). It involves taking
small groups of farmers through an eight-step process from initial group formation to test
marketing, scaling up and strengthening.
The CRS Clustering Approach to Agroenterprise Development (CRS-Philippines 2007) involves
facilitating the development of farmer marketing groups or clusters using an eight-step process
which is outlined in Figure 1. Step 1 involves identifying the project site, building partnerships
with farmers and other stakeholders such as local businesses, local government and NGOs,
forming a working group and providing a project and cluster orientation to interested farmers.
Step 2 involves farmers in identifying the community’s resources, products, production practices
and marketing alternatives. The farmers then decide on the product or products that will be the
focus of the cluster group based on the availability of markets and their ability to finance and
produce the products. Step 3 involves the farmers undertaking a market chain study. Farmers
are trained in conducting a market chain study and conduct market visits in which they develop
understanding of the chains for their selected products. They then select the best chains to work
on and conduct initial negotiations with potential buyers.
In Step 4 interested farmers form the cluster, select leaders and agree on a basic cluster
agreement and objectives. Step 5, or cluster plan formulation, involves developing a plan for
the cluster to grow and harvest the selected vegetables and deciding on the test marketing
plan, which consolidates market, supply, management and financial plans. In Step 6, the test
marketing activities involve assessing the performance of the trial deliveries and making
adjustments and improvements. At least four trial deliveries are involved. If the test marketing
activities are judged successful, Step 7 involves planning and conducting a scaling up process
which involves expanding operations either through producing and marketing more or new
products or performing more market chain activities. Readiness for scaling up is assessed with
criteria that appraise cluster willingness, level of product supply, market performance,
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
109
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
management performance and financial trends for the cluster. The final step of cluster
strengthening involves undertaking capacity building activities that expand cluster capacity and
networks with other clusters and businesses to improve cluster maturity. See ‘The Clustering
Approach to Agroenterprise Development for Small Farmers: The CRS-Philippines Experience’
(CRS-Philippines, 2007) for further information.
Figure 3. Steps in clustering approach to agroenterprise development
8
Cluster
strengthening
Towards New
Clusters/Enterprises
1
Site Selection,
Partnership Building,
Form Working Group
7
Scaling up
2
Product Supply
Assessment & Selection
6
Test marketing
5
Cluster plan formulation
3
Market chain study
4
Cluster formation
This paper discusses our experiences with implementing this process including successes,
failures, lessons learnt and opportunities to improve the process. Some successes have included
increased income from better marketing and product quality and increased capacity of farmers
to investigate, negotiate and deliver to institutional markets. Failures have arisen from
production issues, financing problems, problems with group cohesion and failure of buyers to
pay for product.
What has been done
Since 2008, three staff from the Upstream Foundation have facilitated the development of 29
clusters involving around 350 participants, with 220 males and 130 females. The clusters are in
three provinces of Mindanao (Bukidnon, South Cotabato and Davao City) and are generally in
villages with poor or no road access, limited electricity and poor communications with the
outside world, although some mobile phone coverage is available for some locations. These
farmers and their clusters have been taken through the stages of the ‘Clustering Approach’ and
have reached various stages of maturity. At the same time, researchers from UPM and Curtin
have been investigating the ‘Clustering Approach’ using an integrated Participative Action
Learning and Action Research Process. These researchers work alongside the field staff and
document group activities, survey farm household resources, production activities, levels of
social capital and other factors in the cluster and the relationship between farmers, clusters,
traders, wholesale traders and institutional markets. They also investigate issues as they arise,
such as problems with and solutions to the financing issue and changes and improvements to
the clustering process. Case studies are developed for each cluster and stories of selected
farmers within the clusters are prepared. Information from these investigations; experiences of
the researchers, field officers and farmers; evidence from the literature; and discussions
between the researchers and field officers are combined to identify and evaluate changes to the
clustering activities and processes.
A key part of the clustering process is to build human and social capital of the farmers and
clusters so that they will be more resilient and able to compete in the increasingly globalised
environment. Therefore, apart from the learnings inherent in the facilitated clustering activities,
a range of training activities are conducted. In the 2010-11 year, 46 training activities were
conducted by the team for the clusters, in which 940 people were involved in 14 types of
capacity building activities.
110
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
Features of the clusters
The clusters are area based, with members normally from the same village or location. Most are
small (less than 15 members) as part of a strategy to minimise conflict and enhance group
cohesion. They normally have a formal chairperson and one or more marketing officers. Some
of the clusters market a single vegetable such as capsicum, while others market a range of
vegetables. Vegetables produced by the clusters include: bitter gourd, cabbage, capsicum,
choko, eggplant, okra, onion, potato, squash and tomato. Between August 2008 and June 2011,
the clusters have collectively marketed 291 tonnes of vegetables, worth PhP6.5 million (A$150
thousand). Most of this production has been in the last year as the clusters became operational
and began to expand their activities.
Before clustering, farmer members had little knowledge of their market beyond the intermediary
to whom they sold their vegetables. This information barrier (Figure 2) meant they were price
takers who sold an undifferentiated product for cash at the price offered by the local trader. An
example of this is farmers from the Ned area of South Cotabato who previously produced and
sold capsicums to local traders. While they produced and sold red and green capsicums they
sold them unsorted and hence did not take advantage of the higher prices available from
consolidators and institutional markets.
Figure 4. Representation of information and financial flows between farmers and their
markets before and after joining a cluster
Before…
Farmer
Trader
Wholesaler
Retailer
With cluster and agro-enterprise training
Farmer
cluster
Physical flow
Wholesaler
Retailer
Information flow
Consumers
Financial flow
Joining a cluster enables farmers to break through this information barrier (Figure 2) and farmer
members of clusters now have much improved understanding and information flows to and from
their key markets. Apart from selling to their traditional trader, farmers are now selling through
their cluster to wholesalers, consolidators and institutional markets such as supermarkets. One
group has even set up its own store in the local market. The cluster farmers from Ned now sell
to a number of customers, but also sort their product and obtain premium prices for red
capsicums. A couple of groups are negotiating with supermarkets and delivering their product
direct to their stores in the city.
Problems faced by clusters
Smallholder vegetable farmers in Mindanao face many difficulties when attempting to supply
institutional markets in addition to their traditional markets. Collaborating to market their
vegetables helps them overcome some of these issues. However, they still face many
constraints.
Poor logistics infrastructure
Perhaps the most important problem smallholder farmers have in competing with imported
product and large-scale domestic and international companies is the logistics associated with
moving their product from their farms to market. Most smallholder farmers have farms on
sloping to steep land located kilometres from sealed roads. Consequently, they often have to
transport their product from their farms to the nearest all weather road by foot, horse and
motorbike. Therefore, it is very difficult to package their product so that it is protected from
damage in its journey to the market.
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
111
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
In addition, after reaching the road, they are forced to transport their product by ‘jeepney’,
which are small, less than 1 tonne capacity vehicles, that are normally used to transport
passengers. In some cases even this form of transport is problematic, with the jeepney going to
the city markets on only 2 or 3 days per week, with unreliable frequency and timing. Another
issue is that costs of transport at most stages from farm to market are charged by the sack
rather than by weight. This includes the cost of loading and unloading, the cost of transport and
taxes on the way to market. Not surprisingly, farmers pack as much as possible into a plastic
sack to the extent that vegetables bulge out the top and are held in by cord. Consequently,
losses due to damage are substantial and vegetable traders and buyers build these losses into
their prices.
In combination, these logistical constraints mean there is little price incentive in the traditional
market for farmers to reduce postharvest losses by improving packaging. The extra costs of
improved packaging can only be justified if the customer is willing to pay a higher price per
kilogram in order to obtain a better quality product with lower amounts of damage and losses.
Some clusters have been able to access institutional markets that pay a premium product for
vegetables packaged in crates rather than sacks, but others have not been able to access these
markets, in part because of their unreliable transport.
Lack of access to finance
Largely because of their low income and asset base, but also because of their remote locations,
most smallholder farmers do not have access to the formal finance sector for working or
investment capital. Consequently, when supplying their traditional markets farmers obtain
finance from the non-formal sector, often the village trader or consolidator. While this allows
them to access credit, the costs of this can be substantial, both directly through high interest
rates and indirectly because they are then linked to these buyers to sell their product and
therefore receive lower prices than might be possible without these constraints. If farmers are
to access alternative markets they need access to other sources of finance. In some cases this
has been solved by linking farmers to a local microfinance cooperative, but this can be
problematic because of the financial requirements to joining these cooperatives and the
penalties if farmers are not able to repay.
Fluctuating prices
Vegetable farmers in the Philippines also receive highly variable prices for their product due to
local supply and demand variations and national climatic effects often due to typhoons and
heavy rainfall events. For example, for one farmer in Bukidnon the price received for squash
varied from PhP1 to PhP18 per kilogram over a two month harvest period. For another farmer,
the price received for eggplant varied from PhP5 to PhP15 per kilogram.
Variable production due to seasonal conditions and disease outbreaks
While Mindanao farmers are relatively lucky when compared with other Filipino farmers in that
they do not have typhoons, they still are subject to torrential rains and dry periods. In addition,
the climatic conditions can amplify disease outbreaks. In combination these factors can cause
crop failures, with clusters being unable to meet their delivery commitments to their
institutional markets. Apart from the loss of income and loss of markets, farmers may also be
unable to meet payments on their loans from either the informal or formal sector, which can
have unfortunate consequences particularly with loans from the formal sector.
Maintaining buyer-cluster relationships
Maintaining buyer-cluster relationships has proved problematic in some instances. This occurs
when farmers do not meet their supply or quality commitments, but can also occur due to
problems at the buyer end. Some institutional buyers have limited understanding of the issues
faced by farmers and make unrealistic demands, while others do not pay cash, or in extreme
cases have had their cheques bounce. Since most farmers don’t have access to the formal
lending sector, prompt cash payment is a higher priority for them.
Cluster and farmer innovations arising from clustering process
The action learning undertaken as a result of the clustering process has empowered farmers and
provided them with the knowledge and skills to adopt a range of innovations (Concepcion et al.
2011) in addition to adopting clustering as a method to market their vegetables.
Developed new products for new markets
Initially the farmers are encouraged to produce and market products with which they are
familiar. This is to reduce the risks associated with producing and marketing as a group.
However, once they develop confidence they then begin to try new alternatives. For instance in
112
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
Bukidnon, a cluster began to supply a food processor with capsicums. For them this was a new
market, but another cluster that had not previously grown capsicum, also began to grow them
to supply the food processor. In South Cotabato, two clusters who were supplying a food
processor began to grow the particular variety that suited the processor’s specifications whereas
previously they had just grown whatever variety was available. Similarly a group of farmers
from Saloy began growing and supplying a range of vegetables to a supermarket. This involved
a range of innovations, from production planning, to harvest coordination, sorting vegetables to
meet quality specifications, repackaging, negotiating with the buyer and so on.
Improved postharvest practices
A key feature of clustering is the emphasis it places on delivering a product to a customer that
meets their specifications. In order to achieve this cluster farmers have begun grading their
vegetables and improving product handling. Grading has enabled farmers to sell the high quality
vegetables for higher prices, which provides an incentive for them to produce high quality
product. Postharvest losses were also high because of poor harvest, packaging and
transportation practices. Where this is possible farmers have begun using cartons and
separating their vegetables from other parts of the load so that damage is reduced. They are
also much more careful when packing, loading and unloading their vegetables.
Improved access to low-cost community-based loans
Prior to becoming members of clusters, many farmers relied on traders to finance their
production inputs because they lacked access to formal lending institutions. However, some
clusters have teamed up with microfinance banks and are now able to obtain small loans for
working and other capital requirements. In some cases this also provides them with a means to
save money, something that was not previously available to them. Another innovation is that
cluster finances are used to make loans to farmers, often for seed, which are paid back after
harvest.
Improved access to local and national government grants
Partly because they are organised as a group and also because they have registered their
clusters formally with the government, cluster members have gained access to financial,
material and training support from local and national government agencies and other NGOs.
What we have learn from our investigations
Our investigations have investigated the outcomes from the clustering process as well areas for
improvement. In the past year (2010-2011), the average income of cluster farmers has
increased by an average of 65%, although as might be expected, there is a considerable
variance between clusters with some more than tripling their income, while one group has had a
slight decline in income. The latter was due to crop failure arising from poor climatic conditions.
Cluster marketing can be empowering
Even if not all clusters survive after the project and after assistance has been withdrawn, the
farmers have been able to organise themselves using their own resources to obtain better
markets for their products. Now, when one market has problems, they immediately go out and
investigate new markets, without the assistance, advice or prompting of the project team.
Previously, farmers lacked confidence to contact and negotiate with large traders and
institutional buyers. This barrier has been broken down for many groups. This new found
confidence in their own abilities is something that will stay with them as individuals and through
its effects on social capital will enhance their ability to organise with others in the future.
Market and agribusiness systems focus
We have learnt that a market and agribusiness systems focus is critical to achieving meaningful
advances to reduce poverty for smallholder farmers. Extension and research projects that are
narrowly focussed, or focussed on production innovations without considering the market for the
products being produced, will be less likely to lead to real improvements in income and to their
long-term adoption. Many innovations will only be adopted when farmers are able to pay for
them and this often only occurs for particular markets. This is especially true of innovations in
post-harvest packaging and transport. However, it is also true of production innovations that
need financing for inputs, which will only occur when farmers develop the confidence that they
will be able to meet the repayment obligations arising from their purchase of these inputs.
Cluster success factors
Success in clustering will only occur when the farmers obtain a comparative advantage from
clustering. This is mostly a better price, but it can also be increased volume or lower finance
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
113
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
costs. The groups that are most successful are those where certain levels of social capital exist
and where leadership is effective and the actions of the clusters leads to improvements in this
social capital. However, the process we have been using has some weaknesses and we are
addressing these (see Murray-Prior et al. 2011) for a discussion of this issue.
Conclusions
Involvement in a facilitated cluster marketing process has resulted in substantial benefits for
smallholder vegetable farmers in Mindanao. This type of process can also be used as a
mechanism to facilitate adoption of a range of innovations that enable the farmers to make
more money. In fact it can be argued that many of the innovations and improvements would
not be possible without this integrated change process with its focus on the whole supply chain
and the agribusiness system. When research, development and extension are integrated using
such a process, the speed of change is greater and cluster farmers are able to meet institutional
market demands. However, it is not easy and the difficulty of scaling up and scaling out still
exists.
Acknowledgements
This work is supported with funding from the Australian Centre for International Agricultural
Research through Component 4, ‘Analysis of selected value chains in the southern Philippines’ of
project Hort – 2007 – 066. Thanks are also due to the local government agencies, private
businesses and NGOs in each of the localities who have assisted our project.
References
CIAT (Centro Internacional de Agricultura Tropical) 2001, Manual series on the Territorial Approach to Rural
Agro-enterprise Development, Centro Internacional de Agricultura Tropical, Accessed 18th July from
http://webapp.ciat.cgiar.org/agroempresas/ingles/manual_series.htm
Concepcion, S.B., Montiflor, M.O., Axalan, J.T., Lamban, R.J.G., Real, R., Batt, P.J., Murray-Prior, R., Israel,
F., Bacus, R.H. & Apara, D.I. 2011, 'Clusters and networks as enablers of product and process
innovation', in Proceedings of The 12th International Conference of the Society for Global Business and
Economic Development: "Building Capabilities for Sustainable Global Business: Balancing Corporate
Success
&
Social
Good”,
SGBED,
Singapore,
21-23
July,
2011,
pp.
1720-1725.
http://sbus.montclair.edu/sgbed
CRS-Philippines 2007, The clustering approach to agroenterprise development for small farmers: The CRSPhilippines experience - A guidebook for facilitators, Catholic Relief Services – USCCB, Philippine
Program, Davao, Philippines.
Roy Murray-Prior, Peter J. Batt, Sylvia B. Concepcion, Marilou O. Montiflor, Jerick Axalan, Ruby J.G. Lamban,
Rodel R. Real, Floro T. Israel, Ricarte G. Bacus & Apara, D.I. 2011, 'Towards a sustainable approach to
clustering small-scale farmers to market their agricultural produce', in Proceedings of The 12th
International Conference of the Society for Global Business and Economic Development: "Building
Capabilities for Sustainable Global Business: Balancing Corporate Success & Social Good", SGBED,
Singapore, 21-23 July, 2011, pp. 136-145. http://sbus.montclair.edu/sgbed
114
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
Opportunities for utilising voluntary policy methods in natural
resource statutory planning
Terry Parminter
PACT Consulting, PO Box 534, Paraparaumu 5254, New Zealand
Email: [email protected]
Keywords: resource management act, decision support, negotiation, promotion, education,
mentoring
Background to Natural Resource Policy in New Zealand
The Resource Management Act (RMA; 1991) is the primary policy instrument used in New
Zealand to guide natural resource use and environmental practices by primary industries and
landowners. The use of all natural resources – air, water, soil, sea, and their associated
indigenous biodiversity and ecological functions are all addressed through the RMA. The Act has
been a highly successful policy mechanism (Ericksen et al. 2003) and it is now about to enter
the third decade since its introduction.
The RMA has three levels of policy administration: central government, regional councils, and
territorial authorities (local government). In the Act, each of these authorities has a unique role
and responsibilities to fulfil. Regional councils were established in 1989 and they administer the
RMA on a catchment basis. Regional plans developed by regional councils set resource use
targets, limits and policies for their region and are developed in conjunction with other local
government agencies, industries and landowners.
Despite its long history, an area of policy that has been relatively under-developed by Regional
Councils is the use of “voluntary policy methods”. In this paper, voluntary policy methods are
assumed to be the least coercive methods for behaviour and social change, available to policy
makers (Howlett and Ramesh 2003). Their effectiveness are related often to the degree of social
unacceptability or approbation with which the target behaviours can be associated.
The use of voluntary methods in regional policy for natural resource outcomes has been of
interest to New Zealand members of Australasian and Pacific Extension Network (APEN) for
some time. In a recent hearing to review the proposed regional plan for the ManawatuWanganui Regional Council, the contribution of voluntary and rule-based methods was
considered. APEN members appeared in the evidence of opposing parties (Parminter 2009;
Botha 2009; Monahan 2009).
Voluntary policy methods for policy makers
There is an extensive policy literature about economic policy methods. So much so that some
people consider that policy analysis and economic analysis are practically synonymous (Bobrow
and Dryzek 1987; Parminter 2009). There have been at least 69 types of policy instruments
described in the economics literature alone (Kirschen et al. 1964). However, voluntary policy
methods have been less well categorised and explained. There have been few developments on
this topic in agricultural extension literature, although the paper by Coutts and Roberts (2003)
provides one exception to this.
Generally policy agencies in New Zealand have followed the Resource Management Act (1991)
in labelling their voluntary policy methods as “promotion” (RMA part2, section 5(1)), “economic”
(RMA part 4, section 24), or “information” (RMA part 4, section 35). When the use of these
terms is compared across regional councils they have been given a range of different meanings
and associated with different specific policy methods. The New Zealand Auditor General in a
recent report (2011) stated that, “The overall quality of the water in our rivers and streams
rates well internationally but is deteriorating. My audit shows that we have reason to be
concerned about freshwater quality in some parts of the country, particularly in lowland areas
that are mainly used for farming [later the report states] non-regulatory approaches and
permitted activity rules are not likely to be sufficient to manage freshwater quality within
limits”.
Such concerns, similar to those of the Auditor General, show that voluntary policy methods are
not being applied well by Local Authorities. Unless there is an improvement in their design and
application the situation may well result in increased use of regulations. There is a need for
specific types of voluntary policy methods to be identified and described according to their
purposes for policy use. The application of the different methods singly and in combination can
then be evaluated, compared and improved. Based upon current usage by regional councils and
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
115
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
behaviour change literature in other disciplines (Parminter 2008), the following list provides
examples of voluntary policy methods:






Computer assisted decision support that informs decision making for desired behaviours.
For example, the use by Manawatu-Wanganui Regional Council of Overseer© as a
nutrient management decision support tool to enable appropriate and sustainable use of
nutrients by farmers.
Economic incentives and disincentives to encourage decision makers to make changes by
reducing the costs of change and/or increasing their advantages. On their own these may
not be enough to justify changes but they can provide an indication of policy direction. An
example of such an incentive is where Environment Waikato have provided a 30%
financial contribution towards the costs of establishing riparian fencing.
Negotiation and cooperation with institutions, committees and groups can be a way of
sharing the burden of policy implementation, compliance monitoring and enforcement
with other organisations. The Dairying and Clean Streams Accord provides an example of
this approach.
Promotion can be used to explain, justify and provide direction about a policy agency’s
preferred behaviours. An example is the New Zealand Accident Compensation
Commission campaign encouraging farmers to drive quad-bikes more safely.
Education encourages learning about and adaptation to, the need for making changes. It
empowers decision makers to understand their own context and if necessary, revise their
ways of behaving in the light of new information. Catchment management groups provide
examples, e.g. Golden Bay (Aorere 2009).
One-on-one direct contact with decision makers tends to be used as the “fall-back”
method used by regional councils, despite its high operational costs. It is generally well
supported by communities and enables staff to customise their expertise to suit the
requirements of decision makers. Land management officers in a number of Councils, e.g.
Greater Wellington Regional Council, working directly with landowners are an example of
this approach.
Use of voluntary policy methods
The agricultural industries have expressed a preference for the use of non-regulatory policy
methods for natural resource management, and they do have a lot of capability with these
methods (DairyNZ 2009). However, their industry strategies do not always put a priority upon
working with policy agencies for environmental outcomes. The current use of accords and joint
research projects goes some way towards overcoming this lack of alignment.
Regional plans under the RMA can include both voluntary policies and rules. A review of existing
regional plans suggests that the terms for many voluntary behaviour methods are used
interchangeably both between and within regional plans (Parminter 2010). In the policy sections
of a regional plan there is a need for voluntary policies and rules each to be guided in different
and specific ways. Voluntary policies can be effective when the limiting human and social
behaviours are described clearly along with the desired behaviours. They also need the
stakeholders and community segments described (Parminter 2008). As an alternative to
including voluntary policies in statutory documents it is possible for the statutory documents to
refer to nonstatutory supporting strategies that can guide voluntary policy methods to achieve
the same objectives.
Combining voluntary policy methods and rules
Voluntary policy methods can be combined with rules and with each other. Combining rules with
voluntary methods is one way to obtain the benefits of both, whilst limiting their individual
disadvantages. Rules and regulations provide clear descriptions of the behaviours desired by
regulators. However on their own, rules may transfer unexpected costs to decision makers and
they tend to penalise any early adopters that cannot pass on their extra costs to anybody else.
The use on dairy farms of new systems of effluent disposal to land rather than to waterways is
one example, where considerable additional capital expenditure (up to $50,000) has been
required Parminter 1995). The extra costs of the effluent systems were not able to be passed on
to consumers.
Combining policies involving computer assisted decision support and economic incentives, with
policies using education, promotion and direct contact with decision makers, is one way to
address attitude change as well as providing financial inducements. Education, promotion and
direct contact with decision makers influence behaviour by providing greater understanding,
encouragement, social support and strengthened capability and skills. These types of methods
rely upon positive and constructive relationships within the affected communities and between
116
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
them and the intervening policy agencies. Ideally, these relationships will have initially been
strengthened through a participatory community consultation process as part of developing
policy documents such as regional plans (Parminter et al. 2011). Positive relationships should
not be taken for granted. Strengthening relationships, generating and receiving feedback and
adapting policy methods will require deliberately including policies for negotiation and
cooperation with stakeholder groups and organisations.
Building upon the rules-framework it will be possible to discuss and negotiate around the degree
of alignment between the purposes and goals of policy agency and the other parties. It will also
be possible to discuss the combined resources and how much capability might be available
collectively to address the policy issues in support of the proposed rules.
Conclusions
In conclusion, an extensive range of voluntary policy methods are available and have been
described for RMA policy makers in this paper. Unlike the use of rules, policies with voluntary
methods in existing regional plans have tended to lack clear objectives and strategies. The use
of voluntary methods has often been fragmented and poorly targeted. By taking a more
strategic approach to their inclusion, voluntary methods can effectively and efficiently address
many regional natural resource issues. Describing voluntary policy methods with greater
specificity will ensure that they are applied efficiently by education and extension staff, industry
and landowners to achieve targeted outcomes.
Key learnings:



Statutory documents in New Zealand, including regional plans in the past, have provided
limited and often insufficient direction to extensionists and others implementing the
voluntary policy methods they describe.
A lack of direction has resulted in staff in regional councils becoming disillusioned in their
potential to contribute towards achieving improved resource management on agricultural
and horticultural properties.
A greater understanding of the range of voluntary methods available and how they can be
applied will improve the design of policy instruments for human and social behaviour
change.
References
Aorere (2009). Aorere: our river our catchment. NZ Landcare Trust. Hamilton, New Zealand.
http://www.landcare.org.nz/user-content/1318-aorere-booklet-sm.pdf.
Botha CAJ (2009). The Statement of Evidence before Hearing Commissioners at Palmerston North. Fish and
Game, Wellington.
Coutts J and Roberts K (2003). Extension Models and Best Practice. Proceedings of the APEN Extension
Conference, Hobart. http://couttsjr.com.au/assets/Uploads/Papers/apen2003couttsja.pdf accessed
September 2011.
DairyNZ (2009). Strategy for New Zealand Dairy Farming: Mapping the course for our country’s dairy
farming industry. Online at http://www.dairynz.co.nz/file/fileid/14354 accessed March 2010.
Ericksen NJ, Berke PR, Crawford JL and Dixon JE (2003). Planning for Sustainability: New Zealand under the
RMA. New Zealand, International Global Change Institute, The University of Waikato, Hamilton.
Howlett M and Ramesh M (2003). Studying public policy: policy cycles and policy subsystems, Ontario,
Oxford University Press.
Kirschen E, Benard J, Besters H, Blackaby F, Ackstein O, Faaland J, Hartog F, Morissens L and Tosco E
(1964). Economic policy in our time, volume 1, general theory, Amsterdam, North-Holland Publishing
Company.
Monaghan R M (2009). The Statement of Evidence before Hearing Commissioners at Palmerston North.
Manawatu-Wanganui Regional Council, Palmerston North.
New Zealand Government (1989). Local Government Amendment Act No 1, Wellington, New Zealand.
New Zealand Government (1991). Resource Management Act No 69, Wellington, New Zealand.
Office of the Auditor General (2011). Managing fresh water quality: challenges for regional councils.
Parminter IA (1995). An economic analysis of the incentives for change towards more sustainable
agriculture in two farming systems in New Zealand. MPhil thesis, The University of Waikato. Hamilton.
Parminter TG (2008). An examination of the use of a human behaviour model for natural resource policy
design and implementation by government (central and regional) agencies. PhD thesis, The University of
Waikato. Hamilton.
Parminter TG (2009). The Statement of Evidence before Hearing Commissioners at Palmerston North.
Fonterra Co-operative Group Limited, Auckland.
Parminter TG (2010). Enhancing effectiveness of voluntary policy measures. A client report for the Ministry
of Agriculture and Forestry. PACT Consulting & MAF.
Parminter TG, Gunn I, and Pawson R (2011). Your view about our environment: public engagement (2010)
for the Natural Resource Regional Plan Review for the Wellington region. Greater Wellington Regional
Council, Wellington.
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
117
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
Restoring the landscape after Black Saturday
Kate Roberts1, Daniel Healy1, Rhiannon Apted2 and Mark Cotter2
2
1
Roberts Evaluation Pty Ltd, 10.06, 343 Little Collins St, Melbourne, Victoria 3000
Goulburn Broken Catchment Management Authority, Shop 5, 10 High St, Yea, Victoria 3717
Email [email protected]
Keywords: Partnership, recovery, local networks, engagement, trauma.
Introduction
The fact that there was a fire in Victoria on the 7th February 2009 needs no introduction. Nor
that a total of 255,417 hectares of land was affected and hundreds of thousands of individuals
were traumatised by the event and by the loss of 173 lives. The area covered by the fires
included the Goulburn Broken region, which is home to over 200,000 people. However, what
does need some introduction are the circumstances that surrounded the need to write this
paper.
Traumatised people needed help to deal with the effects of the fires and so did the natural
environment. These people were put in touch with various government agencies to help them
recover and the Goulburn Broken Catchment Management Authority (GBCMA) began its work on
the natural environment. The main issue for the GBCMA staff was how to work with the wildlife
on private property or public property adjoining private land without causing further distress to
landowners they might encounter.
The GBCMA in consultation with Landcare and the Department of Primary Industries (DPI) came
up with a number of strategies that not only worked but brought relief to some landowners who
were also concerned about the state of the wildlife. Roberts Evaluation was initially asked to
develop an evaluation plan to account for the funding received from the federal government for
the recovery of the natural areas. When this work was settled and projects in place, we were
asked to document and evaluate the process the GBCMA and others had used to involve the
community in the recovery process. We were asked in particular, to look at the effectiveness of
using community organisations and networks, such as Landcare, as a model for involving a
community, already in crisis, in the recovery of the natural environment from a catastrophic
event. This paper looks at the process of engagement rather than the process of biophysical
recovery.
Methodology
The method of what data to collect and how to measure the effectiveness of community
engagement was developed with the GBCMA staff, in particular, Mark Cotter, who was the
Dryland Strategy Manager at the time. The key evaluation questions he wanted asked were:
Was it organisations or individuals who were the key to your knowledge of:



what was happening?
what opportunities there were to get more information?
getting involved in or contributing to the recovery program?
What skills were most useful to the recovery programs, particularly those that
relied on community participation?
What role did senior managers of government have/what role do they need to play?
What is the value of investing in community networks during a crisis?
What are the differences between implementing environmental activities in and
without a crisis?
What elements does a model to implement environmental recovery during a crisis
need to have (people, funds, institutions) that is different to an implementation
model at other times?
The data collection involved a review of relevant documents, interviews with nominated
individuals and a focus group with a range of stakeholders.
Interviews
Interviews were conducted with a range of community members and agency staff. These were
people from:


118
Fire affected communities, lay community members (6)
Local Landcare groups (3)
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum







© Copyright AFBMNetwork
The Upper Goulburn Landcare Network (UGLN)
The Shire of Murrindindi
The Shire of Mitchell
The Goulburn Broken Catchment Management Authority (GBCMA)
The Department of Primary Industries (DPI)
The Department of Sustainability and Environment (DSE)
Parks Victoria.
Those who had received some form of assistance with environmental recovery works but were
not directly involved in the decision making process are referred to here as lay community
members. Six lay community members were interviewed and four of these were also involved
with their local Landcare groups in some way.
A further four interviews were conducted with informed community members. These were
members of the Upper Goulburn Landcare Network, local Landcare groups and the Community
Environment Fire Recovery Coordinating Committee. Six interviews were also conducted with
agency staff. This included DPI staff, Landcare project officers, and local council staff. In total,
16 individuals were interviewed.
Focus Group
A focus group was held with 11 staff members of the GBCMA, DPI, DSE, and Parks Victoria. The
purpose of the focus group was to address the question regarding the differences between
implementing environmental activities within and without a crisis situation.
Findings
Was it organisations or individuals who were key?
Members of the community who were involved in the study reported that the staff of the
Victorian Department of Primary Industries (DPI), the Upper Goulburn Landcare network
(UGLN), local Landcare groups and the Goulburn Broken Catchment management Authority(
GBCMA) were the main source of information about what needed to be done with regard to
environmental recovery. Furthermore, there were key individuals within these organisations
who knew what needed to be done and where or whom to ask. For example, they knew who to
ask about where habitat had been destroyed or polluted and animals (including fish) needed
attention. GBCMA staff stated that key individuals within the Landcare community were critical
to providing information about what needed attention, the delivery of information about
environmental recovery activities, developing projects and helping with the implementation of
those projects.
Members of the Lions club, Rotary, the Uniting Church, Berry St1 and non-fire affected Landcare
groups were also nominated by the community as sources of both information and help – this
included help beyond that to do with the environment. Both agency staff and community
members mentioned the importance of knowing when landholders were ready to engage in
environmental recovery works. It was the community members who knew who was affected and
to what extent and this helped the GBCMA staff know when and where they could take action.
A meeting held between members of Landcare, DPI and the GBCMA within a week of the main
Kilmore-Murrindindi fire provided a focus for activities for both the environment and the
community. The role of GBCMA staff then became one of negotiator with State and Federal
Government regarding funding.
Therefore, was it individuals or organisations who were key? Ultimately, it was individuals who
were the key. The fact that they were located in organisations that had the right to intervene
gave them added legitimacy but it was their knowledge of local situation and their personal
operating style that made the interventions effective.
The skills that were most useful to the recovery program
The study found that the skills and qualities most useful in the recovery process, particularly
with respect to agency staff, were:


Experience and confidence to act quickly (decision making), and to manage the
consequences.
Knowing where to go to help in the community.
1
Berry St is the main community service organisation in Alexandra. As part of the Victorian Bushfire Case
Management Service, Berry St staff are assisting with individual help in housing, finding employment and
the rebuilding process
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
119
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum



© Copyright AFBMNetwork
Knowing community networks and how to reach landholders.
Knowing when to engage with landholders was particularly important.
Coordination of funding, donations and volunteers in a dynamic and confusing space was
also an important skill.
Some staff took it upon themselves to take action such as asking landholders about what
needed to be done, organising volunteers, being flexible about spending project funds so that
they reacted to the needs of the landholders as well as to the needs of the environment. Many
interviewees also remarked that the process of environmental recovery was greatly aided by the
social connections that were formed and then strengthened by the process. For example, by
providing individual assistance to landholders on their properties, agencies and groups were
able to discuss environmental management issues such as protecting natural assets and
enhancing biodiversity. In the implementation of the program there was a link between health
services and natural resource recovery. At DPI or Landcare information sessions about
environmental recovery there were also health counsellors available if people chose to speak to
them. Similarly, case managers who provided physical and mental health support also provided
information on who to contact with regard to the environmental recovery needs.
The role played by senior managers
The role for senior management was difficult to get right. In some cases they needed to take
control and actively promote a calm and considered approach to recovery, and in other cases
they need to delegate control to the local staff. For example, with regard to taking control, some
community members became quite distressed about trees. Some felt that they should be cut
down immediately especially those close to houses and roads and others felt trees were why
they chose to live where they did. Some unlicensed tree felling took place that government did
not stop for fear of causing more distress. Some in the community felt that senior government
managers should have acted by communicating what the regulations were and what was
needed for the recovery of the natural environment.
With regard to delegating control, it was felt that senior managers, especially at the Federal
level, should have released the promised funds more quickly so that recovery could start
immediately and been more confident that local government staff could be accountable. Several
organisations and individuals bore the cost of initial works until they were finally subsidised.
The value of investing in community networks
Existing relationships prior to the fires were crucial for establishing trust in a time of crisis. The
key point for the staff of the GBCMA was the value of funding and building social capital – prior,
during and post crisis situations. In the past, the GBCMA staff continued to support Landcare
networks such as with the UGLN after the funding for projects ceased. This policy helped to
maintain relationships which were critical for the GBCMA staff when they needed to connect with
landholders after the 2009 fires. The UGLN and Landcare were ready and able to manage and
coordinate community input to and community led recovery of the environment.
The GBCMA staff found that investment in social capital (be developing their own networks and
relationships with groups such as Landcare) created an informed community and established a
trusting working relationship that could react quickly to crisis situations. The sheer scale and
impact of the 2009 fire meant that communications were very challenging for a long time after
the fires and again, local community networks and connected agency staff were called on to
help.
A number of respondents noted personal and social benefits of being part of a network that
helped the recovery of the physical landscape and people’s properties. These activities helped
with the emotional recovery and helped people to deal with the trauma and tragedy by allowing
them to feel connected and part of the community.
Also of particular importance is how community consultation is managed in this process.
Consultation should not be onerous on the community or repetitive, and should lead to
outcomes or resolutions. It is also important to understand the level of responsibility for
decision making a particular community is willing to take on. Some communities felt
comfortable with what they were asked to do, others felt that the responsibility was too great
for a stressed community; others again felt that they were provided lip service but were not
given the power to be effective.
120
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
The differences between implementing environmental activities in and without a
crisis
The question on the differences between implementing environmental activities in and without a
crisis was primarily answered by the agency focus group. A prominent and divisive issue in this
crisis was that of regulation and enforcement of environmental standards. It was felt that
environmental regulations were suspended as a result of the politics of the situation, for
example, large scale clearing of native vegetation on private property and on road verges, and
that this created distress within the community and on-ground staff.
Another key difference between carrying out activities in crisis was the extreme level of loss and
destruction and as a result the need to consider community readiness to engage in
environmental recovery activities. The GBCMA had to rely on the good will they had built over
the years with existing community networks to assist with finding out the local community
members’ readiness for support. Even so, it was also felt that this could have been done better.
The main barrier was the lack of funding and staff resources for this task. Staff workloads were
already high because of the on-ground recovery activities; engagement was added to this role,
but without adequate training (for dealing with trauma), resources or time allocated. This needs
to be considered as an important component of funded recovery activities in the future.
The key point here is that on-going engagement and support for community networks in noncrisis situations allows for better communication, engagement and support after a crisis.
Funding was difficult to negotiate. There was confusion over what would be funded, and by
whom. This led to delays in communicating the types of works to be funded and how they would
be delivered, resulting in confusion between agencies and the community. It also meant that
some critical on-ground works, e.g. dam water supply protection and stock containment
fencing, were slow to begin.
Consideration of the timeframe for recovery and community support is important in managing
future crises. It was felt by the community that a program of support that suited the timeframe
of the community would have benefited recovery and ensured that most people were able to be
a part of the program. The timeframe differed for each community and depended not just on
the devastation caused by the fire but on community readiness to act. This feedback needs to
be communicated to funders and included in program planning where possible.
The model
A key element of the model used to implement recovery activities was the use of community
networks, such as local and regional Landcare networks, to connect with individuals, assess
needs, coordinate activities and deliver on ground works.
Soon after the fires, members of the Upper Goulburn Landcare Network, Department of Primary
Industries and the Goulburn Broken CMA met to discuss how to assess the needs and how to
best approach fire recovery activities. A short questionnaire was developed for landholders to
indicate what recovery work they would need done. This formed the basis of assistance required
and was used for applying for funds and the subsequent recovery activities.
The GBCMA played a key role in providing funding and support to the Landcare networks both
before and after the fires.
The investment in the community and social networks was seen as critical for both achieving
environmental recovery and also as an end in itself in terms of connecting with the community
and helping individuals. Human and environmental recovery were intricately linked. Some
individuals reported that ongoing help or follow-up offers of assistance gave them hope and the
sense that they were not alone, especially when they were dealing with the trauma of the fires
and the efforts to rebuild and restore their lives and livelihoods. The value of networks such as
Landcare is that they are concerned with all land in their area and not just that of their
members and so all landholders have the same access to help.
Literature review
We were asked to collect data from the various stakeholders who were involved in working with
the GBCMA recovery program to see if DPI and GBCMA staff had done something extraordinary.
It was felt that the recovery program had gone very well and that the GBCMA and agency staff
felt that they were able to make a difference. It was a small study, so to justify the findings for
this paper, we also looked at the literature of what others had done in similar circumstances.
With regard to the first question about whether it was individuals or organisations that were the
key, we did not find much in the literature other than that some individuals work very well in a
crisis (Bonanno 2004) or that they can be taught to be resilient (APA 2008; Flynn 2008). The
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
121
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
role of organisations to legitimise contact with victims of trauma was not raised, although their
role to provide information, training and to know where to go for information was stated (Flynn
2008; Hickson; Dass-Brailsford 2008; Commonwealth 2010; Commonwealth 2011). Flynn
(2008) went so far as to say that government had a responsibility to prepare communities for
traumatic events by making them self sufficient and their members resilient. He said that
governments can do this by warning of dangers (such as the possible hijacking of aeroplanes of
which they apparently were aware) and telling citizens what they can do about these dangers.
Dass-Brailsford (2008) talks about the need to connect trauma victims with their communities
and networks immediately after the event. She described her experience of helping a young,
non English speaking man connect to other individuals who could speak his language and to
whom he could tell his story. This example was similar to what fire victims also said about
connecting with each other. A study by Webber and Jones (2011) into the 2003 Canberra fires
also found that community networks were important for the recovery process. It could also be
that for some traumatised individuals, looking after the wildlife on their properties gave them a
job to do, a distraction and a purpose which was seen by the American Psychological Association
(2008) as important.
The value of the literature review for this paper was that the GBCMA staff can feel that it was
appropriate to proceed cautiously with regard to the community. While the study by Bonanno
(2004) shows that less than 30% of trauma victims are severely affected, there is still a need to
proceed carefully because the effects are unpredictable and that trauma affected individuals
may resist all help (DeWolfe 2000). That they built networks in advance of a crisis would be
envied by many who wrote articles.
Conclusion
Landcare, DPI and GBCMA staff worked on instinct when they developed and implemented their
environmental recovery program immediately after the 2009 Victorian bush fires. They were
cautions about approaching affected communities directly and relied on local organisations and
networks to make first contact. They supported individuals within their own organisation who
had the skills and qualities to find out what needed to be done and how to implement a proper
process. Their investment in the community and their networks were critical to the recovery
work which was helpful for the environmental and the landholders. Some of the findings of the
study are supported by the literature. Others such as the actions taken by senior management
need further research to uncover what were the issues and how senior management can best
react in a crisis.
References
The American Psychological Association 2008, ‘Resilience: After a Hurricane’, APA Help Center - Disasters &
Terrorism . http://www.apahelpcenter.org/articles/article.php?id=113 2/24/2008
Bonanno, George A. 2004 ‘Trauma and Human Resilience: have we underestimated the Human Capacity to
thrive After Extremely Aversive Events?’ American Psychologist January 2004, Vol. 59, No. 1. Pp20 – 28
Commonwealth of Australia 2011 Australian emergency management handbook series: Recovery, Handbook
2, DRAFT, the Australian Emergency Management Institute, part of the Commonwealth AttorneyGeneral’s Department
Commonwealth of Australia 2010, Guidelines for the Development of Community Education, Awareness &
Engagement Programs, first edition.
Dass-Brailsford, Priscilla 2008, ‘After the Storm: Recognition, Recovery, and Reconstruction’ Professional
Psychology: Research and Practice 2008, Vol. 39, No. 1, 24–30
DeWolfe, D. 2000,·Training Manual for mental health and human resource workers in major disasters, 2nd
edition,
National Mental Health Services Knowledge Exchange Network, The Department of Health and Human
Services Washington D.C.
Flynn Stephen E. 2008, ‘America the Resilient: Defying Terrorism and Mitigating Natural Disasters’ Foreign
Affairs, March/April 2008
Hickson, Helena. 2011 ‘A walk along the boulevard of expression’ The Australian Journal of Emergency
Management Volume 26, No. 2, April 2011
Parker Cindy L. 2006, ‘Introduction to Mental Health and Disaster Preparedness’, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg
School of Public Health,
Volunteer action plan reference group 2009, National action plan for the attraction, support and retention of
emergency management volunteers, Commonwealth government.
Webber, Ruth and Jones, Kate 2011, ‘After the bushfires: Surviving and volunteering’ The Australian Journal
of Emergency Management Volume 26, No. 2, April 2011
122
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
Working with the Vietnam Women’s Union– why a social–
political organisation makes a good research partner
Michelle Smith1 and Suzie Newman2
2
1
New South Wales Department of Primary Industries, University of Newcastle, Ourimbah NSW 2250
New South Wales Department of Primary Industries, Vietnam Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Vinh
Quynh, Thanh Tri, Hanoi, Vietnam
Email: [email protected]
Abstract. Many projects desire to ‘make a difference’ and ultimately their success is
determined by the practice change that it evokes at the end user. Research for development
projects, such as those commissioned by the Australian Centre for International Agricultural
Research (ACIAR), recognises that the pathway to impact is long term. To enhance the
chances of success, partnerships need to be built that lead to project outputs being taken up
and propagated by existing systems and networks. In Vietnam, the Vietnam Women’s Union
(VWU) is one example of an existing network that can effectively do this. For the ACIAR
Indigenous Vegetables project (AGB/2006/112) the VWU is the lead partner in a project
designed to develop and test models that improve the profitability of women farmers
supplying indigenous vegetables into transforming markets. The project is also looking to
develop effective communication strategies for women farmers that encourage practicechange, in both the production and marketing of their crop. This collaboration is an unusual
one for ACIAR. Traditionally research partners, particularly lead partners are agricultural
institutions or University departments. The VWU is a social-political organisation with goals
that include raising the capacity and knowledge of women, to affect gender equality. They
operate on four administrative levels within Vietnam–central, provincial, district and
commune. This provides them with an extensive network enabling them to integrate new
information into existing systems and promote change at different levels. The use of
multidisciplinary teams has long being advocated in research for development work (Conway
1987, Grandstaff & Grandstaff 1987). When they exist, typical team structures could be a biophysical scientist, economist, social scientist, a specialist depending on project need such as
ecologist, marketing specialist, or climatologist. As a political government organisation the
VWU has real power which can be utilised by the project to bring about practice change. This
paper uses the VWU as a case study and supports the inclusion of project partners with a
community centred advocacy role.
Keywords: Vietnam Women’s Union, social-political organisation, multi-disciplinary, capacity
building
Introduction
Building effective partnerships is recognised as one of the ‘success factors’ in ‘research for
development’ style projects that achieve their desired outcomes. To enhance the chances of
success, partnerships need to be built that lead to project outputs being taken up and
propagated by existing systems and networks. In this paper, we explore one such partnership
with the Vietnam Women’s Union (VWU), a social-political organisation with extensive networks
at every level of Vietnamese society. We look at how they can ‘add value’ to an agricultural
research project on indigenous vegetables, particularly through their understanding of and
linkages with the communities in which the project operates.
Projects that make a difference
The central theme addressed by the ACIAR funded Indigenous Vegetables project
(AGB/2006/112) is ‘how do we bring about change in the marketing and production of
indigenous vegetables?’. The project is centered in NW Vietnam, working with 6 communes in
Lao Cai and Phu Tho provinces. These communes are diverse in terms of their socio-economic
characteristics, ethnic make-up and the experience of commune members in vegetable
production.
The aim of the project is to develop and test models that improve profitability of women farmers
supplying indigenous vegetables into transforming markets. The project is also developing
communication strategies that facilitate practice change in women smallholders. The ‘hub’ of
research activities is the development of a farmers business school (FBS) in Lao Cai and Phu
Tho Provinces, with appropriate linkages to markets. In Australia, research into potential new
Asian vegetable crops, is creating new financial opportunities for growers in NSW. Partnerships
are also being forged with Australian indigenous women in the production and marketing of
Australian indigenous products.
To achieve this broad range of activities a multi-disciplinary team has been formed. The
Australian Commissioned Organisation is the NSW Department of Primary Industries. Project
partners in Vietnam include: the Vietnam Women’s Union (VWU) who are the lead organisation,
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
123
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
Vietnamese Academy of Agricultural Science (VAAS, the Department of Agriculture and Rural
Development (DARD) and Plant Protection sub-departments (PPsD), Food Crop Research
Institute (FCRI), the National Institute for Medicinal materials (NIMM) and the Centre for
Agrarian Systems Research and Development (CASRAD). The team consists of; scientific
researchers who are specialists in postharvest, agronomy, botany, plant physiology; extension
and farmer field school Master Trainers; agricultural economists; social scientists, and supply
chain experts.
ACIAR funded projects are ‘research for development’ style projects. This project follows an
action research spiral – planning leading to action leading to critical review and reflection,
leading to action and so on. The action research process is particularly suited to cases in which
you want to achieve change (the ‘action’) and understanding (the ‘research’) at the same time
(Dick 2002). The involvement of stakeholders in this process provides more information about
the situation, giving rigour to the critical reflection stage. It also creates a structure for
participation, allowing a relationship to be developed between stakeholders (Dick 2002). There
are a wide range of stakeholders in this project including; farmers, transporters, wholesalers
and consumers.
Effective engagement at the farm level in developing countries requires the support of local
organisations. They are crucial for sustainable resource and development. Local organisations
are embedded in local social structures and have developed personnel relationships within
communities. They are therefore likely to be highly participatory and aware of their members
needs and interests (Cook and Grut 1989). Local organisations also have a development role
within the community. Strengthening the capacity of existing organisations can ensure that
practice change is adopted at a local level (Warren 1992; Atteh 1992). It is also likely to lead to
more sustainable development, as organisations such as the VWU are there for the ‘long haul’.
VWU Case Study
The VWU is the lead Vietnamese agency for ACIAR Indigenous Vegetables project,
AGB/2006/112. The VWU was founded in 1930 and has a membership of above 13 million
members belonging to 10,472 local women’s union in communes and towns throughout the
country (VWU, 2011). The organisational system is divided into four levels, central, provincial,
district and commune. This provides strategic leadership that ensures Government policy
reflects the needs of women and allows government initiatives to be extended to all levels of the
community. This structure also provides for change to be readily embraced on a number of
different levels. For a research project this can provide long term sustainable development as
research recommendations are adopted.
The VWU are a potent political and social organisation. Its goals include raising the capacity and
knowledge of women, to affect gender equality. VWU tasks include:




Mainstream development and empowerment of women
Take part in formulating laws and policies and protect the rights and interests of women
Assist women’s education and economic development
Extend international relations and cooperation.
The VWU have an extensive communication network that includes radio, television and print
media. This allows them to extend their reach beyond their members to the wider Vietnamese
population. Additionally with their established networks they have a system in place that can be
utilised to both disseminate information and provide feedback on the ‘grassroots’ needs of
women and their communities. As a result of their communication network they have enabled
effective stakeholder engagement and participation throughout the project.
Within this project the VWU have been valuable partners in identifying lead farmers. Their
expertise in working with ethnic minorities has enabled the project to work with different ethnic
groups including, Tao, Hmong and Muong. They have provided advice on issues such as local
customs, important times in seasonal calendars, training requirements. The project sits in the
‘Department of Ethnic Minorities and Religious Affairs’ with staff in this Department coming from
a diverse range of cultures. This enables them to readily understand the issues these groups
face and readily develop approaches for the research team to follow.
VWU experience in promoting health and education programs has been harvested to help in the
promotion of indigenous vegetables to consumers. The VWU coordinated an indigenous
vegetable cooking competition between local restaurants in the North Vietnamese tourist region
of Sa Pa. This was conducted in a public arena with local restaurants using selected indigenous
vegetables in innovative dishes. Dishes were sampled and voted on by the public. This had the
dual purpose of encouraging local restaurants to incorporate these vegetables into their menus
124
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
and allowing the public to see how they can be prepared and cooked. A follow on activity by the
VWU has been the development of recipe cards that will be available in retail outlets where the
vegetables are sold. These kinds of activities make the indigenous vegetables supply chain more
sustainable by expanding local knowledge and consumption of their use.
The VWU have also contributed resources and skills in the provision of microfinance and
business skills and training for smallholders. A farmer marketing group has been successfully
established in Lao Cai Provence. The presence of the VWU in the District and Provincial level
makes administrative processes less burdensome.
With a fundamental platform of advocacy for women, VWU presence in the project team
provides a focal point for the research. This keeps research activities relevant and accountable
to meeting the projects aims of capacity building of women farmers. As advocates for improving
health amongst the Vietnamese population, particularly children they will continue to promote
incorporation of Indigenous vegetables into diets after the conclusion of the project. This will
provide long term sustainability for the project.
Along with the Plant Protection sub Department (PPsD) the VWU will be the distributors for the
Farmer Business School (FBS) that is being developed. As co-authors and producers of the
resources they have an understanding of how the school should best be delivered and how to
utilise the resource package. Again this enables out-scaling of project outcomes and ensures
longevity. Relationships built between project team partners mean revisions and updates of the
FBS can be made with minimal expense and effort.
Partnering with organisations such as the VWU improves the likelihood of achieving long term
sustainable development. In the case of the Indigenous Vegetables project their understanding
of and linkages with the communities in which the project operates have been critical to the
design and implementation of project activities. Likewise they have benefited from their
partnership with agricultural research institutes by being exposed to new technologies and
interventions that may improve the livelihood of smallholders. Shared learning and benefits
from these partnerships are likely to extend well beyond the life of the project.
References
Atteh, D. 1989. Indigenous Local Knowledge as a Key to Local-level Development: Possibilities, Constraints
and Planning Issues in the Context of Africa. Studies in Technology and Social Change, No.20. Ames,
Iowa: Technology and Social Change Program, Iowa State University.
Cook, C. and M. Grut 1989. Agro-forestry in Sub-Saharan Africa - A Farmers' Perspective. World Bank
Technical Paper No. 112. Washington, D.C.: The World Bank.
Conway, G.R., (1987) The Properties of Agroecosystems Agricultural Systems, 24, 95-117
Dick,
B
2002.
Action
research:
action
and
research
[online]
http://www.scu.edu.au/schools/gcm/ar/arp/aandr.html
Grandstaff, T & Grandstaff S. (1985) A conceptual basis for methodological development in rapid rural
appraisal In Proceedings of the 1885 International Conference on Rapid Rural Appraisal Khon Kaen
University, Thailand
Warren, D.M. 1992. Strengthening indigenous Nigerian organizations and associations for rural
development: the case of Ara community. Occasional Paper No. 1. Ibadan: African Resource Centre for
Indigenous Knowledge.
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
125
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
Intentional Innovation Communities: strengthening innovation
performance in the Northern Inland Region of NSW
Philip Thomas1, Sujana Adapa1, Elizabeth Davies1, Michael Fortunato2 and Theodore
Alter2
1
2
University of New England, Armidale, NSW 2350
Center for Economic and Community Development, The Pennsylvania State University, Pennsylvania, USA
Email: [email protected]
Abstract. In order to overcome the challenges and make best use of the emerging
opportunities in regional Australia, it is important that the adaptive potential of the region is
identified, tapped and deployed with purpose. The goal of creating a prosperous and
sustainable future for regional Australia requires sustained leadership, creativity, and
motivation and determination, combined within a concerted effort to identify, develop and
implement ideas to support and benefit regional communities. Creating and implementing a
strategy and framework to support and stimulate innovation is necessary to achieve that goal.
This paper re-introduces the concept of an Intentional Innovation Community and focuses on
a current strategic community based development promoting innovation in the Northern
Inland Region of NSW Australia.
Keywords: Regional Australia; Leadership; Ideas; Adaptive Potential.
Introduction
Innovation is the process of creating and using new and existing knowledge to develop useful
things that work, and generate value in society. Acknowledging that the source of innovation
resided across our communities, industry and research institutions (Von Hippel 2005),
Intentional Innovation Communities (IICs) look to create “spaces” or “communities” that further
the assembling of a critical mass of knowledge and expertise, build on the creative strengths of
participants, and identify opportunities within the context of place and region – resulting in the
stimulation of localised, innovative action. The IIC model (Evans and Thomas 2010) is based on
3 propositions:
1.
2.
3.
The existence of untapped resource, able to produce innovations within largely
unorganised cohorts of individuals who have latent skills, aptitude and ability to produce
innovations.
The expertise making up this resource is, in the main but not exclusively, found outside
universities and research institutes.
Improving our innovation performance there needs to be less emphasis on it being a
private process and more on it being a social process
It is well recognised that innovation is a real force for change that can enable the forging of a
sustainable and prosperous future (Venturous Australia 2008; Powering Ideas 2009). However,
despite the recognition of the importance of innovation, there has been little support available
for the development of systems that can enable innovation. In order to take advantage of
opportunities that present in a range of within and across geographical locations and a range of
socio-economic contexts, a different approach to encouraging and stimulating innovation is a
worthy challenge. The approach proposed by Evans and Thomas(2010) aimed at taking best
advantage of our current opportunities to utilise the strength of our communities tacit expertise
knowledge and creativity in order to develop and maintain locally contextualised and productive
Intentional Innovation Communities. As a core principal of IICs is the recognised need for an
operating system where the governance structure and processes need to be determined by the
participants themselves. To achieve this goal, the potential for local citizens, entrepreneurs and
representatives of institutions to participate within an Intentional Innovation System had to be
identified and a clear consensus on what the system would look like, needed to be investigated.
This paper reports on the activities of a current project: Regional Innovation: Strategic
Development Community Based Innovation in the Northern Inland Region of NSW and the
directions that are emerging from that project.
Project overview
On 5th September and following the completion of eight weeks of field work within a project
exploring the potential for improving innovation within the Northern Inland Region of NSW, Dr
Philip Thomas Principal Research Fellow with BEPP and Professor Ted Alter PENN State
University presented a debrief seminar for invited guests from Government and the community
at the MLC Centre, in Martin Place, Sydney (Plate 1).
126
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
Within the project, nine workshops, seven seminars and six interviews were carried out in towns
across the Northern Inland Region of NSW within July, August and the beginning of September
2011. As part of this project, Professor Alter and his PSU colleague Dr Michael Fortunato
travelled to UNE to assist in the workshops. This also enabled their direct involvement in a
program of research projects involving innovation and engaged scholarship within the newlyformed Ideas to Action Centre, based at UNE.
The approach taken within the Innovation Strategic Development Project was based on a
philosophy of engaging directly with individuals from the communities of the region so as to
allow direct participation of individuals in the co-creation of community agency and to stimulate
the development of an “innovation culture” across the region. In this way, the project focused
on investigating opportunity for strategic development for improved innovation and intentional
innovation communities in Northern Inland Region of NSW. As IICs are comprised of individuals
that form places or “Communities” created specifically to achieve innovation, (Evans & Thomas,
2010) the current project team engaged with groups (including over one hundred individuals)
from Armidale (Plate 2), Tamworth, Moree, Narrabri and Bingara.
The aims of the project were to capture emergent ideas and opportunities and identify barriers
for innovation. Within the investigation the potential for innovation within the communities was
examined and a regional network of “innovators” created across the region. From this network,
the aim is to develop a community innovation action potential within and across communities of
the region.
Some of the ideas for innovation that emerged from the workshops included linking with the
National Broadband Network (NBN) to develop business opportunities, capturing opportunities
arising from mining activity and agriculture, developing a regional approach to waste
management, and developing and promoting “cultural hubs” with a focus on the music and
creative arts strengths of the region – (particularly Armidale and Tamworth). There was also a
recognised focus on addressing social issues such as the engagement of the young, the ageing,
and the Indigenous members of regional communities.
The future
The ongoing aim of this project is to catalyse the development of the innovative ideas that have
emerged to date and assist in enabling the harnessing of the wealth of knowledge and
experience available within communities of the region in a cost effective manner. The IIC
initiative is seen as cost effective strategy, relative to the alternative community development
methods such as industrial recruitment, tax abatement schemes or traditional business
incubators. The final meeting under the current project has a regional focus and is planned for
October this year, in Bingara NSW. The aim here is to identify ideas and opportunities for
innovation that have most potential, and particularly those that are relevant to communities
across the region. The potential for creating a structure and process around the innovation
network that has formed will be explored so as to create support for innovative activity within
virtual and physical spaces. The intention is to create a sustainable, ongoing system capable of
improving innovation performance for the communities of the region and the institutions that
support them.
Acknowledgements
This was a collaborative project between UNE and PENN State University with funding support
from the Department of Trade Investment NSW (DTI). The project would not have been
possible without the support of the Cotton Communities CRC, the Tamworth Regional
Development Corporation and the Armidale Chamber of Commerce.
References
David A Evans and Philip Thomas (2010) Intentional Innovation Communities: A strategy for radical
improvement of Australia’s innovation performance.Extension Farming Systems Journal.Vol 6 (1).
Eric von Hippel 2005, Democratising innovation. MIT Press, CambridgeLondon.
Powering Ideas: an innovation agenda for the 21st century.Department of Innovation, Industry, Science and
Research. Retrieved 20 May 2009 from www.innovation.gov.au/innovationreview
Venturous Australia - building strength in innovation, Department of Innovation, Industry, Science and
Research. Retrieved 29 August 2008 from www.innovation.gov.au/innovationreview
U
U
U
U
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal
127
Extension Farming Systems Journal volume 7 number 2 – Industry Forum
© Copyright AFBMNetwork
Plate 1: Professor Ted Alter presenting with Dr Philip Thomas at the Community
Innovation Project de-brief at the MLC Building in Sydney
Attendees included: Peter Gregory (AusIndustry); Ross Maclennan (TRaMS – Training Resource and
Multimedia Studio); Jason Scattolin Innovation Council -DTI); Andrew Stead (ATP Innovations); David Mac
Smith (Commercialisation Australia).
Plate 2: Michael Fortunato and Dr Philip Thomas facilitating one of the Innovation
Workshop held at Armidale NSW in July 2011
128
http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/science/saws/afbm/archive/efs-journal